-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > FSF probably would agree with my tariff argument but would argue > that it isn't the essential point. The essential point is that > (in their view) ownership of bits is simply wrong.
This is not correct (at least neither to my understanding of the FSF standpoint nor to my personal one): it is completely ok to have non-disclosed bits on ones computer, which then do fulfill the characterization of "owning" used here. The point is actually, that if one hands away a copy of these bits, one should not be able to control what happens to this copy. - -- - -ness- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFTPJXvD/ijq9JWhsRAgSSAJ4x5ci35stoMRbWWRbAShFtSu63oQCeL8t3 Dy9Pqdhq0thD+hoLwyGLX00= =ykIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
