In article <[email protected]>, David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote:
> ZnU <[email protected]> writes: > > > I understand that the FSF is really, really hung up on every detail > > of the GPL, but frankly, they're fanatics. > > Fanatics have copyright like everybody else. Sure, I'm not saying they don't have a right to try to enforce the requirement to make source available even in the case of unmodified binary distribution. I'm just saying that there's no particular reason why anyone who's more interested in the practical impact of the GPL rather than the ideology behind it should be particularly concerned about entities failing to distribute source as required in instances where that source is trivially available elsewhere. [snip] -- "What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works [...]" -- Barack Obama, January 20th, 2008 _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
