David Kastrup writes: > An "illegal document"? Well, I've heard quite a few weird attacks on the > GPL, but this is the first time I see someone suspecting it to be > pornography or similar.
Well, the doofuses at SCO claimed GPLv2 was "unconstitutional". The phrase "illegal document" doesn't make a whole lot of sense, though, at least under US law. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
