The license _does_ apply. It is you who don't get it. You are saying that all companies that have illegal copies of Windows, are not breaking the law, since they are `for internal use' and no rules apply.
You are also speaking about some kind of owner of the software, you cannot own software! I don't know where you got that idea. You are obviously confusing property law and copyright law. If you give me a copy of a program on a CD, then I cannot do what I want with the _CD_, this is perfectly true. But I can do whatever I want with the _CONTENT_ on the CD _if_and_only_if_ the license allows me to do this. You cannot go and say that the license is void because of this or that reason; no judge in the world will agree with you nor will any lawyer. The GPL has _NO_ clause that allows you to `violate the license for internal use'. Copyright law still applies within the walls of a company; always has and always will. Go look up how succesfull evil companies like the BSA are in suing the hell out of companies for violating copyright laws, where they have used software that was legally aquired and then copied several times in breach of the license that the copyright holder granted to the company. Infact, the BSA has succesffully sued _PRIVATE_ people for copyright violations. But according to you, this is simply impossible since you can do whatever you want with a private copy of something; this is obviously completely false since there is already a legal precendet of that this is completely and utterly bogus. Copyright law has no concept of `internal use'. That some FAQ says this or that is completely and utterly irrelevant. The only person who doesn't understand how law operates is you, you have also shown complete and utter lack any candor, and have resorted to name calling on several ocassions. The only person spreading falsehoods is you David. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss