On 01/04/15 22:17, Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting David Woolley (for...@david-woolley.me.uk):
A significant number of postings on this list are from people who
are trying to interpret GPL in a way that would be inconsistent with
any CC-like summary of it. Those people would still try to find
loopholes based on the full licence, not the lay summary.
IMO, their pain is a happy accident.
So, basically, what's your point? I believe Nigel's audience of concern
was reasonable people seeking to understand a legal instrument, not
rules-lawyering proprietary software businesspeople.
It means he may think that the licence is preventing the sort of
commercial exploitation he doesn't like, but the commercial exploiter
will ignore the words he is relying on and instead exploit based on
their attempt to re-interpet the letter of the formal licence.
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
