David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> >>
> >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > "Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> >> So then why must it too be free, why must the license require that
> >> >> to be free?
> >> >>
> >> >> To keep things free, again, this was answered as well before.
> >> >
> >> > Man oh man, you're krank. Suppose he takes PUBLIC DOMAIN work and
> >> > links it with the GPL'd work. Nobody can apply ANY copyright license
> >> > to work in public domain.
> >>
> >> You are confused. Licenses apply to particular _copies_, not some
> >
> > Copyright licenses apply to work, idiot.
>
> Copyright arises from works, licenses (which require copyright) apply
> to copies.
Stop being an utter idiot. Think human brain. And why I'm not
surprised that in the GNU Republic copyleft licenses apply to human
brains ("copies"). Heck, what a wonderful concept... think of
destroying illegal copies. LOL.
regards,
alexander.
--
This message is brought to you courtesy of the Anti-GNU Imperium.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
