"Moshe Goldfarb." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:43:52 GMT, thufir wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:03:27 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Wow...
>>> That kinda sucks.
>>>
>>> Usually parents say something like "you're beautiful in a sp
Roy Schestowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> / Rjack on Saturday 16 August 2008 12:05 : \
>
>> Sincerely,
>> Rjack
>
> .-.
> |O_-_X|
> | File Options Tools Help |
> `_-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
/ Rjack on Saturday 16 August 2008 12:05 : \
> Sincerely,
> Rjack
.-.
|O_-_X|
| File Options Tools Help |
`_-_--_
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:40:14 -0700, Rekruled wrote:
> "Moshe Goldfarb." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:43:52 GMT, thufir wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:03:27 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>>>
>>>
Wow...
That kinda sucks.
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:43:52 GMT, thufir wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:03:27 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
>
>
>> Wow...
>> That kinda sucks.
>>
>> Usually parents say something like "you're beautiful in a special kind
>> of way".
>
> Ever see that farside cartoon where the parent penguin te
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 07:57:51 -0400, Rjack wrote:
>> Where does he get this notion that every license is a contract?
>> They're similar, certainly, but, AFAIK, one isn't a subset of the
>> other.
>>
>>
>> -Thufir
>
>
> "Whether express or implied, a license is a contract 'governed by
> ordinar
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:03:27 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
> Wow...
> That kinda sucks.
>
> Usually parents say something like "you're beautiful in a special kind
> of way".
Ever see that farside cartoon where the parent penguin tells its child
something like:
you're unique just like everyone
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 05:42:21 -0400, Rjack wrote:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> Rjack, ye reeking ronyon, thou has no more brain than mine elbows, ye
>> squalled:
>>
>>> thufir wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:45 -0400, Rjack wrote:
You're a fucking moron who can't read: you have no ri
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 12:34:12 -0700 (PDT), Rex Ballard wrote:
> On Aug 16, 4:31 pm, Linonut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
>>> understand this decision so that we need never again hear th
* Snit peremptorily fired off this memo:
> "Linonut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> stated in post
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 8/16/08 11:08 AM:
>
>> * Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>>
>>> Have a nice day Linonut!
>>>_ _
>>> |_| |_|
>>
Rjack, ye stinking distrustful recreant, thou would answer very well to
a whipping, ye gibbered:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> Rjack, ye fetid idiot, a ruffian that will swear, drink, dance, revel
>> the night, rob, murder and commit the oldest of sins in the newest
>> kind of ways, ye cooked up:
>>
Rjack, ye fetid idiot, a ruffian that will swear, drink, dance, revel
the night, rob, murder and commit the oldest of sins in the newest kind
of ways, ye cooked up:
> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>> Rjack, ye reeking ronyon, thou has no more brain than mine elbows, ye
>> squalled:
>>
>>> thufir wrote:
>>>
Rjack, ye reeking ronyon, thou has no more brain than mine elbows, ye
squalled:
> thufir wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:45 -0400, Rjack wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> You're a fucking moron who can't read: you have no rights to modify the
>> code distribute, unless...
>
> My mother used to tell me that.
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
Rjack, ye stinking distrustful recreant, thou would answer very well to
a whipping, ye gibbered:
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
Rjack, ye fetid idiot, a ruffian that will swear, drink, dance, revel
the night, rob, murder and commit the oldest of sins in the newest
kind of ways, ye
thufir wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:17:29 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
What if the license lacks consideration?
If it lacks consideration it is not a contract. If it is not a contract
it is not a license.
And if it is not circular, it isn't reasoning. Or something.
Where does he get this
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
Rjack, ye fetid idiot, a ruffian that will swear, drink, dance, revel
the night, rob, murder and commit the oldest of sins in the newest
kind of ways, ye cooked up:
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
Rjack, ye reeking ronyon, thou has no more brain than mine
elbows, ye squalled:
thuf
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 11:17:29 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> What if the license lacks consideration?
>>
>> If it lacks consideration it is not a contract. If it is not a contract
>> it is not a license.
>
> And if it is not circular, it isn't reasoning. Or something.
Where does he get this no
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
Rjack, ye reeking ronyon, thou has no more brain than mine elbows, ye
squalled:
thufir wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:45 -0400, Rjack wrote:
You're a fucking moron who can't read: you have no rights to modify the
code distribute, unless...
My mother used to tell me t
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rahul Dhesi wrote:
>> Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Is is really that painful to admit that a copyright license *is* a
>>> contract. Why the elaborate simile (i.e. using the comparative
>>> "LIKE")?
>>
>> What if the license lacks consideration?
>
> I
thufir wrote:
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:45 -0400, Rjack wrote:
You're a fucking moron who can't read: you have no rights to modify the
code distribute, unless...
My mother used to tell me that. . . didn't help one bit.
Sincerely,
Rjack :)
You have a really a nice day thufir!
_
Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Is is really that painful to admit that a copyright license *is* a
contract. Why the elaborate simile (i.e. using the comparative "LIKE")?
What if the license lacks consideration?
If it lacks consideration it is not a contract. If it is n
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:56:45 -0400, Rjack wrote:
> If you believe GPL sec. 5 then you also probably believe that the tooth
> fairy rides on the back of a flying pig.
>
> "5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
> signed it. However, nothing else grants you permissio
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Is is really that painful to admit that a copyright license *is* a
>contract. Why the elaborate simile (i.e. using the comparative "LIKE")?
What if the license lacks consideration?
--
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/
__
Rex Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>The key difference between a license and a contract is that no
>ownership is transferred to the licensee
Say what?
--
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
Rex Ballard wrote:
On Aug 16, 4:31 pm, Linonut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
understand this decision so that we need never again hear the
nonsense claim that "The GPL is a license and not a
Tim Smith wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
However, first you have to have a contract. With an offer looking to
form a unilateral contract, it is offeree's performance that acts as
acceptance of the contract. If offeree does not perform, as specified
in the offer, there is no accepta
Rex Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A Copyright license is very much LIKE a contract, and it is as legally
> binding as a contract, however, there aren't a set of conditions that
> fulfill the contract at which point it is no longer necessary to honor
> the terms and conditions of the license.
Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LOL.
>
> David Kastrup wrote:
>
> (carefully snipping the links to word "vertrag" aka "contract" in
> relation to the GPL)
>
> [... in legal matters, the decisions of the courts ...]
>
> http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
> http://www.jbb
"Linonut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> stated in post
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 8/16/08 11:08 AM:
> * Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
>> Have a nice day Linonut!
>>_ _
>> |_| |_|
>> | | /^^^\ | |
>> _| |_
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Halliwell wrote:
>> Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Anyone who finds that language ambiguous should probably return to
>>> kindergarten for a refresher course in reading skills. It's either
>>> that or perhaps their cognitive skills are hopelessly imp
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Context eh?
>
> I posted a link to the complete decision and you replied to my post, so
> you would have access to the court's decision.
What did that decision have to do with the GPL?
It was a completely different license. All that was required in that license
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone who finds that language ambiguous should probably return to
> kindergarten for a refresher course in reading skills. It's either that
> or perhaps their cognitive skills are hopelessly impaired like a large
> number of Eben Moglen's true believers.
IF th
On Aug 16, 4:31 pm, Linonut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> > My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
> > understand this decision so that we need never again hear the
> > nonsense claim that "The GPL is a license and not a contract
LOL.
David Kastrup wrote:
(carefully snipping the links to word "vertrag" aka "contract" in
relation to the GPL)
[... in legal matters, the decisions of the courts ...]
http://www.jbb.de/urteil_lg_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
http://www.jbb.de/judgment_dc_frankfurt_gpl.pdf
Let us count the number of "ver
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "That the government's promise to issue the loan guarantee was
> contingent upon High Plains and Wells Fargo's performance of
> numerous conditions does not make the promise any less binding.
> Indeed, the essence of a unilateral c
David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I repeat: in legal matters, the decisions of the courts, not the
commentators, count, regardless how silly you and isolated
commentators may consider them.
David, that must then be your opinion of:
"[A] condition precedent
Linonut wrote:
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
Linonut wrote:
I'd be curious as to your professor's opinions of your research.
I'm curious too, but Methuselah seldom emails anyone anymore.
Sincerely,
Rjack :)
___
gnu-misc-discuss mail
Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Since they share this property with the courts and their decisions
>> quite
>
> Please (re)visit the link below, you amusingly crazy clownish GNU GPL
> true believer dak.
[...]
> The caveat being (comment from a third
Andrew Halliwell wrote:
>
> Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Anyone who finds that language ambiguous should probably return to
> > kindergarten for a refresher course in reading skills. It's either that
> > or perhaps their cognitive skills are hopelessly impaired like a large
> > number of
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Have a nice day Linonut!
>_ _
> |_| |_|
> | | /^^^\ | |
> _| |_ (| "o" |) _| |_
>_| | | | _(_---_)_ | | | |_
> | | | | |' |_| |_|
* Alexander Terekhov peremptorily fired off this memo:
I don't truck with insults, generally. Especially in cross-posts.
--
All of a sudden, I want to THROW OVER my promising ACTING CAREER, grow
a LONG BLACK BEARD and wear a BASEBALL HAT!! ... Although I don't know WHY!!
Andrew Halliwell wrote:
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Halliwell wrote:
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyone who finds that language ambiguous should probably return to
kindergarten for a refresher course in reading skills. It's either
that or perhaps their cognitive skills are ho
Alexander,
OMG. This guy sounds just like Daniel Wallace (it isn't though):
"Dammit, the world at large has been far too nice to these people for
far too long. There's no sin in people getting rich and/or famous,
but how they did it deserves some scrutiny. The FSF is leading
thousands of ideal
Andrew Halliwell wrote:
Rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyone who finds that language ambiguous should probably return to
kindergarten for a refresher course in reading skills. It's either
that or perhaps their cognitive skills are hopelessly impaired like
a large number of Eben Moglen's true
Linonut wrote:
[...]
> http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf
>
> MySQL gets protection for its trademark, but the other guys can still
> use the GPL code.
>
> Who's crazy here? It's not the GPL "true believers", that's for sure.
http://www.newsforge.com/ar
Linonut wrote:
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
Not really. Here is your link, I believe:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/88/88.F3d.1012.95-5125.95-5121.html
What does a loan guarantee have to do with copyright or the GPL?
I counted roughly fifty-five references to
David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Linonut's message quoted below proves that you just can't reason with
> > the GNU GPL true believers. Amusingly crazy clownish guys.
("The GPL is a license and not a contract")
>
> Since they share this property wi
* David Kastrup peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Linonut's message quoted below proves that you just can't reason with
>> the GNU GPL true believers. Amusingly crazy clownish guys.
>
> Since they share this property with the courts and their d
* Alexander Terekhov peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Linonut's message quoted below proves that you just can't reason with
> the GNU GPL true believers. Amusingly crazy clownish guys.
>>
>> > http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/MySQLcounterclaim.pdf
>> >
>> > MySQL's counter-complaint asserting breach
Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Linonut's message quoted below proves that you just can't reason with
> the GNU GPL true believers. Amusingly crazy clownish guys.
Since they share this property with the courts and their decisions quite
consistently, that's fine. Laws are interpr
Linonut's message quoted below proves that you just can't reason with
the GNU GPL true believers. Amusingly crazy clownish guys.
regards,
alexander.
Linonut wrote:
>
> * Alexander Terekhov peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> >
> > Linonut wrote:
> >>
> >> The good faith usage of the GPL has b
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Linonut wrote:
>
>> Huh? You take quotes out of context and expect them to be meaningful?
>>
> Context eh?
>
> I posted a link to the complete decision and you replied to my post, so
> you would have access to the court's decision.
>
> Your mouse butto
Linonut wrote:
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
Linonut wrote:
I'll believe it has the effect you want when it hits the headlines due
to an actual court case involving the GPL.
The effect *I* want is irrelevant. It is the direct unequivocal language
of the court that counts:
"When
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Linonut wrote:
>
>> I'll believe it has the effect you want when it hits the headlines due
>> to an actual court case involving the GPL.
>
> The effect *I* want is irrelevant. It is the direct unequivocal language
> of the court that counts:
>
> "When a
* Alexander Terekhov peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> Linonut wrote:
>>
>> The good faith usage of the GPL has been going on for a couple decades
>> now, and has resulted in a large body of software being available to
>> millions of people. A conflict with business was inevitable, but, in
>
Linonut wrote:
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
understand this decision so that we need never again hear the
nonsense claim that "The GPL is a license and not a contract".
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/88/88.F
Linonut wrote:
>
> * Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>
> > My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
> > understand this decision so that we need never again hear the
> > nonsense claim that "The GPL is a license and not a contract".
> >
> > http://bulk.resource.org
* Rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
> My dream is that Eben, RMS, and all GPL true believers read and
> understand this decision so that we need never again hear the
> nonsense claim that "The GPL is a license and not a contract".
>
> http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/88/88.F3d.1012.9
I have finally found in the precise language of a court, a
description of the error Eben Moglen, Richard Stallman and PJ
have been committing for all these years about the GPL being a
license and not a contract. It explains all those mutterings
about "unilateral permissions" and why you don't have
59 matches
Mail list logo
