Adding an About property is OK but removing it is equally OK.
This is not even on grey area as I wrote earlier. PilotLogic had all rights to remove your property. Complaining about it was yet another false accusation against them.
You copied the same complaint to many forum threads here, clearly trying to trigger another flame war against CodeTyphon and PilotLogic.
However it seems they violate your Mozilla license by not providing "a file documenting the changes You made to create that Covered Code and the date of any change".
Mozilla license sucks IMO. Why they make such a demand which only restricts freedom? Freedom after all is the main theme of open source.
@mrisco, would you please consider changing your license to LGPL? Then it would match the license of LCL and many other packages/components.
Adding the About property into your component emphasizes that YOU made it. Why do you want to have it there? Why is a text file not enough? Complaining when somebody removed it raises more questions.
There may be better ways to boost your ego than open source development.
Looking at a bigger picture, open source and its licenses are very new. For example GPL promises so much freedom and is so idealistic that it scares me. All good idealistic doctrines in history have turned into something else, typically to the very opposite of the original idea.
It can be already seen here. When somebody actually uses the freedom promised by GPL, he is called "immoral" or "behaving bad". Whatever excuse is used to attack him. Why this reminds me of how religions have been used as an excuse to attack other people again and again during milleniums?
GPL is so new that even its original creators are still around. I believe Free Software Foundation will quide its usage in near future. Later, maybe after hundreds of years things change. GPL will have amendments that turn its meaning around or something similar. The fundamental problem is the evil nature of human beings, desire to control other people and take away their freedom. GPL will not be an exception among idealistic doctrines.
But, we don't need to worry about that. We can concentrate on present time.
The freedom provided by GPL is no joke. Many details are explained here:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.htmlIt allows for example:
- A big company can modify GPL code as much as it wants and use it internally without giving the source code to anybody.
- A person can modify GPL code and ask a million dollar price for it. Nobody will buy it and it remains in his personal use which is allowed anyway.
- A person can modify GPL code and sell binaries compiled from it without including sources or even providing a download link for them. Sources must be provided when a customer requests them explicitly.
I try to prevent this Lazarus project being used as an instrument for turning GPL ideas upside-down.
I am also planning to mention the well known hate-blog to Free Software Foundation because it spreads thick lies about GPL. Why can it continue doing so without any penalty? It clearly has worked as an inspiration for hate posts here.
Hating something always attracts followers. It is quite horrible.