From 2f447979923a724316cb6c66e852b9e8ebd0eaa7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Martin Michlmayr Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 14:19:37 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] A missing word --- www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html index 8e5543bf..4a687562 100644 --- a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html +++ b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ been unable to achieve compliance, either, through his negotiations in 2014. VMware's last offer was a proposal for a settlement agreement that VMware would only provide if Christoph signed an NDA, and Christoph chose (quite - reasonably) not to sign an NDA merely to look at settlement offer.

+ reasonably) not to sign an NDA merely to look at the settlement offer.

Thus, this lawsuit comes after years of negotiations by Conservancy to achieve compliance — negotiations that ended in an outright refusal by