Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 01:38:58PM +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > were widely touted as proof of its efficacy. One of these days
> > someone who is anti-GPL will find it advantageous enough to finally
> > swat that annoyance. "
>
> You mean, like Daniel "anti-GPL lunatic" Wallace?
No. I actually meant a defendant not willing to settle, not a plaintiff
like Danial Wallace.
But thanks to Danial Wallace, the 7th Circuit of the United States now
operates under the following law:
1.) [FOSS contributors can't charge] "Thus the GPL propagates from
user to user and revision to revision: neither the original author,
nor any creator of a revised or improved version, may charge for the
software or allow any successor to charge. ... Linux and other
open-source projects have been able to cover their fixed costs
through donations of time"
and
2.) [FOSS is junk] "People willingly pay for quality software even
when they can get free (but imperfect) substitutes. Open Office is
a free, open-source suite of word processor, spreadsheet and
presentation software, but the proprietary Microsoft Office has
many more users. Gimp is a free, open-source image editor, but the
proprietary Adobe Photoshop enjoys the lion's share of the market."
and
3.) [FOSS is doomed] "The number of proprietary operating systems
is growing, not shrinking, so competition in this market continues
quite apart from the fact that the GPL ensures the future
availability of Linux and other Unix offshoots."
EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for 7th Circuit.
regards,
alexander.
--
"The revolution might take significantly longer than anticipated."
-- The GNU Monk Harald Welte
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
