Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> > [...] >> >> benefitting the general public >> > >> > Hey dak, care to address the following (2nd one below) Dan's comment >> > regarding the "public"? >> >> Just a rant, and obviously so. > > http://floatingpoint.wordpress.com/2006/10/16/off-the-record/#comments
[...] Another rant. >> The FSF does not even "control" ... > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt > > "the intent is to ... control the distribution of derivative or > collective works based on the Program." > > eh? Which means that the public must not be deprived of the freedoms intended by the licensor: yes, the copyright holder has the "control" over nobody else grabbing control he chose to refrain from exercising himself. And since the general public is _not_ deprived of the freedoms established by the GPL, neither the FSF nor other people can seize control over the fate of GPLed software. Which is obvious since (as you conveniently snipped again) the FSF has not been able to even contain forks of Emacs and gcc. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
