On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 16:01:38 +0100, Petr Novotny wrote:
>That's about something different: That's about some lame theory
>which says that if you're requesting a document by http, you're
>making a copy and you need authorization. I fail to see
>daemontools-something.tar.gz as a document.
Of course it's a document.
>Anyway, for anal-retentive types, a promise "I won't sue you" put
>somewhere on the web by someone claiming to be djb doesn't cut
>it.
>And yes, I'm being anal retentive now.
Would you be happy if someone claiming to be DJB had put up a
daemontools package on the same site and in it given you the same info,
or said that it's GPL? Would you require a PGP signature? Would a PGP
signature have any legal value?
DJB should decide to sue me for using daemontools (p<epsilon), I think
that I could make a very reasonable argument: Why would he put it
there, document and advertize it, if he didn't want people to use it?
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
