Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 20:59 +0200, David Kastrup escreveu: > Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Sonny! Uncle Hasler has spoken! > > > > John Hasler wrote: > >> > >> 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. > > > > http://supreme.justia.com/us/38/157/case.html > > > > "a void, useless, and illegal document" > > I should hope that you can come up with something better than a > verdict from 1839: one has to suspect that the formal use of certain > terms in the legal profession might have evolved somewhat in the last > 168 years. Even then, the word "illegal" in this passage of the > verdict is not employed in a formal sense but as part of a rhetorical > figure.
Specially because they were talking about fake insurance contracts and not of copyright licenses. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
signature.asc
Description: Esta é uma parte de mensagem assinada digitalmente
_______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
