Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In comp.lang.lisp Alexander Terekhov wrote: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> > Hyman Rosen wrote: fix(f) != f ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 09:59:52 -0400, Tamas K Papp said: I disagree -- I don't think that the FSF considers the GPL a "poor fit" for libraries. Quite the opposite (see [1]). They just recognized that in certain situations, some people would prefer something like the LGPL, and I guess that they wanted

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In comp.lang.lisp Hyman Rosen wrote: > On 3/25/2010 10:05 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Licenses covering a work "as a whole" are hard to press > > when the material they cover is functionally a drop-in > > replacement of existing non-free libraries. That makes > > "mere aggregation" a really good d

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 09:51:04 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: The FSF does not believe that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. The release of the Library GPL is an implicit recognition of the fact that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. Renaming it to the Lesser GPL isn't likely to convince anyone old

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:44:14 -0400, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-25 06:06:09 -0400, Andrew Haley said: > >> There's nothing ironic about it. The FSF seeks to maximize freedom, so >> licenses code whichever way works best. Libraries sometimes have >> different needs from applications. >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-25 06:06:09 -0400, Andrew Haley said: There's nothing ironic about it. The FSF seeks to maximize freedom, so licenses code whichever way works best. Libraries sometimes have different needs from applications. Which is why I suggest that Pascal's lisp libraries would be more usefu

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In gnu.misc.discuss Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: > > My principal objection to the GPL is that its license requirements > regarding opening source code make it very unpopular with many > commercial developers, and therefore whenever possi

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-24 15:23:28 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: Actually, MacOSX is just NeXTSTEP, and is older than Linux, so it's not surprizing it has more web clients than Linux. After all, NeXTSTEP was the system where the web was INVENTED, and where the first web browser was ever IMPLEMENTED!

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-23 09:41:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: > >> Since much of the discussion in this newsgroup >> focuses on license features and requirements, saying that Mac OS X >> "is" BSD needlessly confuses that issue. > > Saying that Mac OS X is BSD is: > > 1. true For so

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 09:41:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: Since much of the discussion in this newsgroup focuses on license features and requirements, saying that Mac OS X "is" BSD needlessly confuses that issue. Saying that Mac OS X is BSD is: 1. true 2. a counterexample to the claim that linux is tr

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: > > > > Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." > > Not really. Darwin may be, but all the graphical folderol running on it > is rather descended (or written new) from older MacOS code not based on > BSD. Well, a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Mar 21, 10:14 pm, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: [...] > > Which is why many developers choose to avoid this possibility and use > > LGPL/LLGPL/BSD/MIT/Apache licensed libraries instead. And now we've > > come full circle. > Sure. > And the

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On Mar 23, 9:11 am, Hyman Rosen wrote: > On 3/22/2010 8:01 PM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > > 2. Mac OS X is BSD Unix. It has existed for half the time that linux > > has, and has more than 5 times the web client share of linux, so yes, > > BSD is on its way to eclipsing linux as a client OS. > I

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 09:11:03 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: It is not correct to say that Mac OS X "is" BSD Unix for normal definitions of "is". Mac OS X *is* descended from 4.4 BSD for normal definitions of "is." Mac OS X *is* a UNIX by the only legal definition of UNIX and for normal definitions of "i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-23 04:53:04 -0400, Lieven Marchand said: As far as I can tell, GPL CLISP would allow you to distribute your commercial applications compiled and dumped with it. My understanding is that if your published application (commercial or otherwise) uses facilities of CLISP not generally a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > That does not keep other people from contributing relevant portions of > code under the GPL, if they so desire. Of course, and it should not. But I think that people contributing to a library usually do so under the same license which is used for the original body of cod

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > In short, I don't think GPL licensing gets you anything additional in > terms of getting code open sourced. Users who need to keep their > source closed either won't use it, or will use in in a way that allows > them not to open the source (e.g., Paul Graham's viaweb a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 22:48:27 -0400, John Hasler said: Purchasing a certificate granting the right to label one's product UNIX does not make it a BSD. Being a derivative of 4.4 BSD makes it a BSD; Being certified by the Open Group makes it a UNIX. Mac OS X is a BSD UNIX. The market reality...

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article <871vfbzrb8@thumper.dhh.gt.org>, jhas...@newsguy.com says... > The Berkeley license as well as _some_ other Open Source licenses permit > them to keep some of their changes secret. This is the very reason some > programmers use the GPL. While I respect Pascal's decision to use wha

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 20:28:25 -0400, John Hasler said: No it isn't. The Open Group which does the official UNIX certification would beg to differ: It's a heavily modified Mach single-server ke

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 16:51:46 -0400, John Hasler said: I guess this is why Linux has been totally eclipsed by BSD. 1. Linux isn't a *library*, it's an operating system. A GPL operating system doesn't force GPL licensing for any application that runs on it. A GPL library *does* force GPL licensing f

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup writes: > It does not get you "anything additional", but it gets you something > _less_: a proprietary product that uses your own code to draw your > user base away from you. This is quite understandable - I would not really like seeing Microsoft use my code. However, when I was i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

RG writes: > In article , > Raffael Cavallaro > wrote: > >> On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: >> >> > Sure. >> > >> > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? >> >> Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 13:03:31 -0400, RG said: I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic means of ensuring maximal adoption. Here is where you are imposing your choices on others. Not everyone shares this quality metric of yours. See my reply to John Hasler for why maxim

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-22 10:52:58 -0400, John Hasler said: You assume that everyone has maximum adoption as their primary goal. I assume that the author's goal is maximizing the amount of open source - and in fact, it is Pascal's stated goal - that others who use his library will open their source code

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article , Raffael Cavallaro wrote: > On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: > > > Sure. > > > > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? > > Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay > you for a commercial licen

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

In article <878w9k1k8l@thumper.dhh.gt.org>, John Hasler wrote: > Ralph writes: > > I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic > > means of ensuring maximal adoption. > > You assume that everyone has maximum adoption as their primary goal. Indeed, if maximal adoptio

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: Sure. And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? Not only am I not imposing anything on you, I've already offered to pay you for a commercial license. So you can have your cake (GPL licensing) and eat it too

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-21 15:29:44 -0400, John Hasler said: > >> Of course, if the possibility that someone might pass the software on >> worries you, the solution is simple: don't link to GPL works. > > > Which is why many developers choose to avoid this possibility and use > LGP

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 15:29:44 -0400, John Hasler said: They might, but there are cases where they did not. One can't rely on this unlikely possibility, which becomes increasingly unlikely the more sales are made. The point is that _you_ are not required to publish anything. It hardly matters wh

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 2010-03-21 11:22:57 -0400, John Hasler said: They are not required to publish it. They are merely required to distribute it along with the binaries. If you offer source to everyone to whom you sell binaries you are done. In practice this amounts to publication. Every customer would receiv

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Nicolas Neuss writes: > p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > >> In-house use would be outside of the scope of the GPL, since no >> "distribution" would occur. > > This means that in-house "distribution" to employees would not count as > distribution in the GPL sense. OK, this

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) writes: > In-house use would be outside of the scope of the GPL, since no > "distribution" would occur. This means that in-house "distribution" to employees would not count as distribution in the GPL sense. OK, this might indeed be the most reasonab

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Nicolas Neuss writes: > Raffael Cavallaro > writes: > >> Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization >> to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the >> source code for any released product that included your library. As a >> result, most people work

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization > to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the > source code for any released product that included your library. As a > result, most people working on commercial published softw

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > The GPL is not preempted by any law, since a law can't "preempt" a > permission. It _is_ unenforceable and states so itself: the licensee > _retains_ the option to use it or ignore it, at will. However, > _copyright_ is enforceable under _state_ law. If you want to

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: RJack writes: As a delusional GPL advocate you choose to deliberately ignore the plain consequences of U.S. Copyright law. "delusional" and "deliberately" are not quite compatible. The GPL is preempted by 17 USC sec. 301, it is unenforceable under contract law and is

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

RJack writes: > As a delusional GPL advocate you choose to deliberately ignore the > plain consequences of U.S. Copyright law. "delusional" and "deliberately" are not quite compatible. > The GPL is preempted by 17 USC sec. 301, it is unenforceable under > contract law and is a misuse of copyri

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/3/2010 8:00 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf "as is evident on the face of the agreement itself ... the GPL, which is the target of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, is a software licensing agreement ... "[T]o the extent that the te

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 4/3/2010 8:00 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf "as is evident on the face of the agreement itself ... the GPL, which is the target of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, is a software licensing agreement ... "[T]o the extent that the terms of an attached con

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 4/1/2010 4:37 PM, RJack wrote: > > Do you make this stuff up on the fly or do you sit > > around and dream about it first? > > On the fly, generally, since your errors are simple > enough to explain and refute without much effort. You mean like refuting "the GPL is a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 4/1/2010 4:37 PM, RJack wrote: Do you make this stuff up on the fly or do you sit > around and dream about it first? On the fly, generally, since your errors are simple enough to explain and refute without much effort. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:34 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: “[t]he economic philosophy behind the [Copyright] [C]lause … is the conviction that encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors.”

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 4/1/2010 9:06 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: yes, I've been telling you all along that the GPL doesn't cover non-GPL'd works included in compilations (aka collective works, aka "mere aggregations" in GNU-speak). You are wrong in every way. Permission from the rights holder

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > For GPL-covered works, the GPL uses the nature of the collective > work to determine how it may be copied and distributed. Go to doctor, Hyman. regards, alexander. P.S. "Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 4/1/2010 9:34 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: “[t]he economic philosophy behind the [Copyright] [C]lause … is the conviction that encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors.”

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 4/1/2010 9:06 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: yes, I've been telling you all along that the GPL doesn't cover non-GPL'd works included in compilations (aka collective works, aka "mere aggregations" in GNU-speak). You are wrong in every way. Permission from the rights holders of components is i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 4:20 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > "It will be unprofitable > > THAT'S AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY > > No, it's not. There is no public policy that it must > be possible to profit in certain fields of endeavor. Uh stupid Hyman... http://www.law.cornell.edu/sup

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > > A “covered work” means either the unmodified Program or > a work based on the Program. Uh stupid Hyman... yes, I've been telling you all along that the GPL doesn't cover non-GPL'd works included in compilations (aka col

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 4:28 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.btlj.org/data/articles/21_04_04.pdf This is a quote of one person's opinions, not of a decided case, so it needs to be understood in that light. "A licensor who contractually prohibited the combination of its software with other progr

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 4:20 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: "It will be unprofitable THAT'S AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY No, it's not. There is no public policy that it must be possible to profit in certain fields of endeavor. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 3:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf The author of this seems not to realize that there is no right to copy and distribute works as part of a collective work without the authorization of the rights holders of the components. Given that incorrect

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 3:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf The author of this seems not to realize that there is no right to copy and distribute works as part of a collective work without the authorization of the rights holders of the components. Given that incorrect

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 3:53 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > To quote the FSF itself, the GPL itself rejects ANY (to repeat: ANY, > > ANY, ANY) automatic aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL > > That's correct, there is no automatic aggregation of software > copyright u

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > the market based on what they offer. The GNU manifesto > does not say that it will prevent people from developing > operating systems, but that it will be unprofitable for > them to do so. > "It will be unprofitable for people to develop drugs. " "It will be unprofita

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 3:53 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: To quote the FSF itself, the GPL itself rejects ANY (to repeat: ANY, ANY, ANY) automatic aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL That's correct, there is no automatic aggregation of software copyright under the GPL. Any acceptance of the

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 3:48 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] copyright protection. As such, the GPL encourages, rather than discourages, free competition... http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html "GNU will remov

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > Fortunately the GPL carefully defines when a collective work > must as a whole be licensed under the GPL and when it need not To quote the FSF itself, the GPL itself rejects ANY (to repeat: ANY, ANY, ANY) automatic aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL, you r

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > > copyright protection. As such, the GPL encourages, rather > than discourages, free competition... http://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html "GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of c

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 3:29 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Recall that the FSF itself is on record: http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf Yes, you have quoted this many times. But I do not think this means what you (pretend to) think it means. What the FSF has said is correct, but none of what it sa

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: whether the copyright is being used in a manner violative > of the public policy embodied in the grant of a copyright. To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limi

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Hyman Rosen wrote: > >> On the contrary, all of my quotes are germane. > > You quoted nothing in your message. > > On other occasions. I lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of your s

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 3:07 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: On the contrary, all of my quotes are germane. You quoted nothing in your message. On other occasions. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 12:43 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > "The copyright misuse defense is similar to an antitrust claim, where a > > copyright owner has misused the limited monopoly granted by the > > copyright. However, the Lasercomb decision made it clear that the > > copyrig

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 12:13 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > You have nothing meaningful to quote from. > > On the contrary, all of my quotes are germane. You quoted nothing in your message, silly Hyman. regards, alexander. P.S. "Every computer program in the world, BusyBox i

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 12:43 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: "The copyright misuse defense is similar to an antitrust claim, where a copyright owner has misused the limited monopoly granted by the copyright. However, the Lasercomb decision made it clear that the copyright misuse defense is available even whe

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 12:13 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: You have nothing meaningful to quote from. On the contrary, all of my quotes are germane. Yours are lengthy, and none of them except those from like-minded cranks support your thesis in any way. Quoting from the FSF and the GPL while willfully fa

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [... "the GPL is not a contract" baloney ...] > Really, you should stop quoting stuff ... How about the following quote, dak? http://www.ifross.org/artikel/russische-foederation-wirtschaftsministerium-wirksamkeit-gpl "Grundlage hierfür sieht es vor allem in Art. 1286 Pkt

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > Misuse of copyright, when applied at all (its appearance is rare > as hen's teeth), is found in anti-competitive and anti-trust http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise15.html "The copyright misuse defense is similar to an antitrust claim, where a copyright owne

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 11:53 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Where does the GPL say that "each case must be examined individually"? > > By specifying ... You have nothing meaningful to quote from. Stop ignoring the facts Hyman. Recall that the FSF itself is on record: http://ww

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 11:53 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Where does the GPL say that "each case must be examined individually"? By specifying different kinds of permissions granted for different kinds of copying and distribution. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [... claiming that non-automatic aggregation isn't mere aggregation ...] > Instead, each case must be examined individually to see Where does the GPL say that "each case must be examined individually" silly Hyman? > which kind of aggregation LOL. It's mere aggegation stupi

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:44 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > To quote the FSF itself, the GPL itself rejects ANY (to repeat: ANY, > ANY, ANY) automatic aggregation of software > copyrights under the GPL That's correct. It rejects any *automatic* aggregation of software copyrights. Instead, each case must b

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:44 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: To quote the FSF itself, the GPL itself rejects ANY (to repeat: ANY, ANY, ANY) automatic aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL That's correct. It rejects any *automatic* aggregation of software copyrights. Instead, each case must be ex

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:39 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: The courts have yet to analyze a copyleft provision for misuse, but the courts have addressed an analogous provision - the grantback. The Supreme Court held that though grant-back clauses can easily be u

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 10:22 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > You must mean a derivative work of a GPL-covered work because the term > > "extension" is also not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law. > > Full stop once again for the same reason: the term "larger program" is > > al

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 10:11 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > IOW, it's "mere aggegation" just like in the GPLv2 > > Yes, the mere aggregation part is mere aggregation, just as the > combined program part is the combined program part. The GPL grants > permission for covered works t

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > > and is a misuse of copyright > > Misuse of copyright, when applied at all (its appearance is rare > as hen's teeth), is found in anti-competitive and anti-trust Not only. http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise15.html "The copyright misuse defense is simila

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:22 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: You must mean a derivative work of a GPL-covered work because the term "extension" is also not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law. Full stop once again for the same reason: the term "larger program" is also not defined in the GPL and/or copyri

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 11:04 AM, RJack wrote: > The GPL is preempted by 17 USC sec. 301 The GPL is a copyright license which authorizes certain actions based on the exclusive rights given to copyright holders by federal copyright law. The federal preemption of state copyright equivalence provisions is comp

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:11 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: IOW, it's "mere aggegation" just like in the GPLv2 Yes, the mere aggregation part is mere aggregation, just as the combined program part is the combined program part. The GPL grants permission for covered works to be copied and distributed as par

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 11:04 AM, RJack wrote: The GPL is preempted by 17 USC sec. 301 The GPL is a copyright license which authorizes certain actions based on the exclusive rights given to copyright holders by federal copyright law. The federal preemption of state copyright equivalence provisions is comp

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective > > works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified > > program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL > > and/or

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law? T

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law? The "unified program"

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Forgot one bit. Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Hyman Rosen wrote: > > > > On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > > http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html > > > The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " > > > > > > http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html "The Software is a collective work of Novell" Note that Red Hat's

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html > > The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " > > > > http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html > > "The Software is a collective work of Novell" >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html "The Software is a collective work of Novell" Note that Red Hat's and Novell's collective

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > But until such a reasoning appears in the _ruling_ but just in one of a > count of charges . . . Uh silly dak. http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf "Nature of Suit: 190" http://directory.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=DO

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> You did not understand a word of what you were replying to, again. The >> whole point was that in the case of a _license_, as opposed to a >> contract, any such stipulation of a _penalty_ is _invalid_, and _only_ >> sustained damages c

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > You did not understand a word of what you were replying to, again. The > whole point was that in the case of a _license_, as opposed to a > contract, any such stipulation of a _penalty_ is _invalid_, and _only_ > sustained damages can actually be claimed. Uh silly da

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> > [...] >> >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is >> >> > >> >> > Da

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> Alexander Terekhov writes: > >> > >> > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > [...] > >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > >> > > >> > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > >> >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> > [...] >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is >> > >> > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: >> > >> > It's established by several courts in Germ

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > > [...] > >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > > > > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > > > > It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB > > contract.

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > > It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB > contract. > > http://www.jbb.de/fileadmin/download/jud

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: Hyman Rosen writes: On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: Hyman Rosen writes: On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate work after the original wor

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB contract. http://www.jbb.de/fileadmin/download/judgment_dc_frankfurt_gpl.pdf "The GPL grants

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 5:15 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > It also means that as far as copyright law is concerned, > > compilation copyright can be licensed as its owner sees fit. > > Got it now? > > There is nothing to "get". The creator of the compilation owns > the copyright

  1   2   >