On Sep 19, 2010, at 2:18 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: > No citation is needed - the GPL is a legal document. Bring it to a > lawyer if you want a legal opinion. You should never rely on the > Internet for legal advice. All we can give you are opinions. Even a > *lawyer* on the Internet can only give opinions - they need to know > the specifics of your case to give legal advice.
> As soon as you > start yelling for proof, I'm stepping away from it. I'm not a lawyer. > You want proof, you need a lawyer. I did not ask for advice or a legal opinion; you expressed one. I only asked you to justify it. You've expressed an opinion that's in contrast to the common "how to use" the GPL pages. If your opinion is now the "party line" as it were, it would behoove you to have the various FAQs updated to reflect this. You won't find many people more strongly in favor of OSS (and OSHW) than me. But in that context, I must say that you are you are making a strong argument against the use of open source licensing. Anyone can write software of their own and publish it under copyright protection, for whatever that's worth. But if all that anyone can say about the GPL is "consult a lawyer if you actually want to use this," it *really* doesn't help us. > I don't know of *any* case where 3b was used, ever. That doesn't mean that it doesn't count. It *has* been used, and much more often than you think. And, you've essentially made the claim that everyone who uses it with online distribution is in violation of the GPL. That's a serious accusation; I don't think that I was remotely out of line to suggest that there should be some justification for it. > You have to find witnesses who can attest that the software was NOT > made available on the date in question. Very hard to prove a > negative. I never suggested that anyone prove a negative. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
