On 1/18/06, Pedro A.D.Rezende <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Object code is a well established term. GNUspeak is irrelevant. > > > > The Copyright Act defines a computer program as"a set of > > statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in > > a computer in order to bring about a certain result. " 17 U.S.C. > > § 101. > > The copyright act is WRONG. > > A computer program can NEVER be "a SET of statements or > instructions...", a computer program has to understood as "a SEQUENCE of > statements or instructions...".
Feel free to submit a patch inserting the word "ordered". Is this the only grief GNUspeakers have with copyright on computer programs? Oh, BTW, I like this: http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/webmink?entry=gpl_v3_released ---- Not required to accept the license in order to receive a copy of the program (no contract is created, still) 183 contract law schemes in the world...can't standardize globally...RMS statement against global copyright system. "We use it because its there. BERN + WTO not a good thing." ---- The fellow really needs to go to clinic. regards, alexander.