mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not see the reason why GNU/Linux should be preferred over just
Linux to refer to the system.
[...]
Google for it. The first hit for why gnu/linux should suffice.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
). Where you have a GNU userland, but augmented with all of
the system utilities from Solaris (not an entirely unpopular setup),
things become quite muddier.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss
.
Whether the associated costs were optimal is a different question. But
other previous approaches had not worked out.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman
, and perhaps most
important of all, the GNU Philosophy of Free software as in Freedom
for the user.
How you can claim time and again with a semi-straight face that you read
the pertinent papers when you act all surprised about their content
every time is beyond me.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr
Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7 Dec 2007 at 12:01, David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[... crying revisionism ...]
Dear GNUtian dak, please visit
Why change the topic? We were talking about a dedicated Linux site
which called Linux a clone of the operating system Unix and said that
this operating system clone
to come up with a plan of countering this sort of revisionism.
And in the wake of that, some schools of belief were made up to clad
this revisionism with a layer of legitimacy. But in the above
quotation, it is still rather bare.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh no. POSIX does not lay out what it means to be a type of operating
system. It lays out what _interfaces_ must be there for certain
degrees of POSIX compliancy. It does not require the embodiment
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh, no. The POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) specification
specifies at several levels what comprises a UNIX-like API.
Thanks, I am aware of this. I think it a reasonable enough thing
Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 7 Dec 2007 at 14:15, David Kastrup wrote:
Apart from which:
[cat --help]
Which is also not all of trivial when compared to some kernel
functionality. I mean, take the fork system call. Before all that
copy-on-write nonsense was invented, it just
that you should omit the credit elsewhere where it would
belong.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
So what reasons do you assume for the many GPL cases that get settled
out of court for defendants with big pockets and plaintiffs with small
ones?
The notion of suing people to force them to publish original or even
?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Arnoud writes:
I've never seen a US case involving the GPL come to a verdict. Of course
there are the German cases, but given the different legal system you can
hardly compare
with anything he's
said.
There is lots of wiggle room between agreeing with Alfred and Alexander.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc
group fruit.
In a nutshell, a single tomato is a fruit, but not fruit.
Or, put differently, you got eggplant on your face.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org
that there is no other place where it is appropriate?
What is this nonsense about proper place as if there could be only
one?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman
.
Windows' security track record does not exactly convince one of closed
source's inherent superiority in this regard.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman
the relevant interpretations are the Federal
Court judges.
Whether or not you consider them Marxist crackpots, they will be the
ones interpreting any other license, too.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu
intimidation tactics.
There is good evidence that commercial companies _are_ incorporating
software under BSD and Apache style licenses. Quite a lot. But this is
not interesting to others since they, as a rule, don't share the
results.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's the rub. Why is so much proprietary, why isn't there as much
Free software as there is proprietary? Hmm...
Because proprietariness turns reinvention of the wheel into a business
model?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Because proprietariness turns reinvention of the wheel into a business
model?
Free software seems to do a hell of a lot of wheel reinvention, too.
But it is optional. And reinventing
people decide to rename it when
it was done in the compass of a different project? Why is it ok to
bereave the GNU project of the credit for its work? And why is it
uncool if the project leaders decide that they want to have their work
known as their work?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793
stuck in my beard.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 16, 1:17 pm, mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 14, 6:32 pm, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is it ok to
bereave the GNU project of the credit for its work?
Credit can be given in other places beside _names_.
The idea it must be given
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 16, 1:50 pm, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whether or not it is the right place to give credit, it turns out
that just constantly trying to get the credit there is achieving the
primary purpose, that of educating people.
So then it seems
there is nothing to be gained from
assigning an interpretation to my words.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 16, 4:12 pm, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I noticed this old post here:
http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/243e191086e80bef?...
QUOTE:
Stallman does not care about
business. But others
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 16, 4:37 pm, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again: I don't set the goals for free software, so it is nonsensical
to assign any relevance to any interpretation of my musings. They
are food for thought, nothing else.
I didn't say you did set
pay his travel costs.
Actually, I think that quite a bit of his personal money (like grants
and prizes) goes into the FSF rather than the other way round.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The pay comes from contributions to the Free Software Foundation. Just
ask Richard Stallman. He travels the world preaching the socialist
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Ciaran O'Riordan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The pay comes from contributions to the Free Software Foundation. Just
of the world rather than
pretending to be able to ignore them.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
mike3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
snip
Going beyond sustainability is not useful in the long run for any goal.
It may be unethical not to donate blood to people in need of it. But
that does not mean that one is a bad person if one does not let oneself
be drained
of not being human-readable, it is certainly one of
those licenses covered most extensively in discussions and FAQs, so
humans have a lot of references to consult in case of doubt (including
the legal department of the FSF).
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
[Somewhat rearranged]
Ivan Fomichev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 14 апр, 14:29, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
readable ;-), b)weak copyleft,
What does weak mean for you? Your example is pretty much like GPL
which is not generally considered weak.
For me, weak copyleft means
1
Ivan Fomichev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 14 апр, 15:18, David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For me, weak copyleft means
1. non-greedy, that is the license must allow any software to get
profit of licensed software
The GPL is not prohibiting profit.
It does. It does not prohibit
).
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
, on the other hand, is simply a blithering idiot.
You can make your own choice I suppose.
It helps to take a look at the track record of both person's
predictions.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu
staying in court and
settle.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How come when RMS decides to wax forth legalistically, there never
seem to be either cases or statutes that back his position?
Because the FSF is not a litigation company and so
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
Moglen is paid by Columbia University to teach law.
[Lots of slander]
And your point being? He is paid by Columbia University to teach law
and has all the required qualifications.
You are not and have not. Simple
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Their track record in court is quite better than Terekhov's predictions.
Moglen is paid by Columbia University to teach law. Nobody gives a dime
for Terekhov's legal advice.
Their track record in court, as plaintiffs, is absolutely
Andersen and Rob Landley. It must also appoint an
internal officer to ensure that it's in compliance with licenses
governing the open source software it uses.
As long as Verizon stays in compliance with the settlement terms, yes,
the court will not hear the case again.
So what?
--
David
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
.
That they can't bring the identical case a second time. Why would they,
when they got an agreement to compliance?
Uh.
Question: For what use
to heed its terms. If he doesn't, he is restricted to
what copyright law allows him.
You won't find You are not required to accept this License in order to
receive or run a copy of the Program in a license from Microsoft.
That's why _those_ licenses are actually contracts.
--
David Kastrup
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup writes:
You won't find You are not required to accept this License in order to
receive or run a copy of the Program in a license from Microsoft
However, in the US that statement is true anyway. It is only when
dealing with Microsoft
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
rjack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A unenforceable license is very useful, without a license, you cannot
do anything.
Well, here is a quote for you from the GPL:
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.
You
the merged result.
Note that this also means that hyperlinking GPLed software like Emacs
with its GFDLed manual and copying examples back and forth between
manual and software is only feasible for the copyright holder.
Which is not really pretty.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
AFAICS.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
rather eat crap. That's not relevant for my own
choices.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
allow a Federal Court to review the
GPL license on the merits. They'll dismiss WITH PREJUDICE before
allowing a meaningful court review to occur.
So far, the defendants have preferred not to go that far but rather come
into compliance.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
to
their unique insights...
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
complex and expensive in contrast).
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
view of the situation even by
just reading the GPL text front to back.
Please pretend to speak to a 6-year old, as I'm a stupid software
developer, not a lawyer ;-)
He pretends to speak _like_ a 6-year old, so this should not be a
problem.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
of wits. Somewhat annoying, but what do you expect?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
to the respective court and swearing that you
have nothing else. It's not actually fun, I guess.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wrote:
In the US inability to pay a debt can never result in imprisonment. I
doubt that it can in Germany.
David Kastrup writes:
You have to declare personal bankruptcy which requires giving all your
personal financial details to the respective
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup writes:
I think if you _don't_ declare personal bankruptcy, prison is actually an
option of the courts (if the readily accessible belongings can't cover
your debts).
I don't think it is here. I believe that the creditors can file
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Forget it, Hyman. You've thrown Terekhov into quote mode. He'll just
respond by citing increasingly erratically selected texts at you,
followed by LOL and similar pieces of wisdom
copyright law but with
contract law, the GPL is a meaningless piece of paper.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
In a jurisdiction without copyright law but with
contract law, the GPL is a meaningless piece of paper.
Not that there is such a place. But the ProCD case has
shown that courts will honor shrinkwrap licenses,
But the GPL isn't
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Terms which you have to agree to before being able to see them?
Yes, as long as you can back out after seeing them and
not be forced to pay.
People have tried backing out of the shrink-wrap of bundled OEM Windows.
More often than
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
People have tried backing out of the shrink-wrap of bundled OEM Windows.
More often than not, it takes considerable hassle and going to court.
That's because they're buying a bundle, which isn't necessarily
separable into parts
of go all the way is supposed to get to a ruling about
the GPL?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
part of the
deal (the $0 part) while D can be excused from compliance with his part.
I mean, get real.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
As far as I remember, Daniel Wallace actually tried some all the way
approach in the U.S., and it was thrown out in the end because his
theories did not even amount to a recognizable complaint.
He doesn't count. First of all, he did
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
I don't see why.
Because any customer could set itself up as a competitor, for one
thing.
Only for already released versions of the software if the author chooses
to change the license. And I made it quite clear that I was talking
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I wrote:
The competitors you created in step one can create competing GPL
versions with the same features.
David Kastrup writes:
That's a nice theory. In practice, you can't hope to keep pace with the
original authors in almost any case unless
already been
done.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
to you.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
was not particularly uncommercial either.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
suing the
SFLC for murder, and be calling any judge thinking otherwise drunk,
mad or similar.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
the inevitability of the outcomes all the time, and
then bluster about incompetence of the judges afterwards.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo
in C.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
in paying A for copying source and binaries _AND_ then make you
unable to do copies yourself?
I mean, it's like circumventing robbery laws by withdrawing money from
your own bank account pointing your gun on an ATM all the while.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
and is an independent seller of
prepackaged software.
A really hard time.
The difference between computers and judges are that neither considers
it funny if you try meeting the letter of the law while violating its
intent.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
You mean if I pay somebody to drop a brick from a window
when I signal him, I am not accountable for murder?
If I hire a company to develop a program for me, that
company is not me. I pay money, I provide a specification
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Where is the point in throwing away valuable material? Where is the
point in paying A for copying source and binaries _AND_ then make you
unable to do copies yourself?
That way Company A gets to have its cake and eat it to.
I
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
I recommend that you reread the thread and decide on who you call A and
who B. It will make it easier for the judge to figure out things.
Oops, I did mix them up. But in any case, there is
no law of copyright that says that if I
. But the line to the hook is held by the author, not the
buyer.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Sale Doctrine.
No, it doesn't. It gives the buyer the possibility to notify the
copyright holder, because the copyright holder (and nobody else) has the
right to enforce the form of distribution.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu
Hyman Rosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
You don't need to become the owner.
It is enough if you become _responsible_.
Enough for what? I just don't understand what you're
saying. Remember, the GPL is just a copyright license.
It has no notion of responsibility
without a license, and that's not an advantage.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
thufir [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:45:15 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
I don't see why their participation is required, it's between the buyer
and the manufacturer.
No. The buyer has no rights derived from copyright law since he is not
the copyright owner.
The buyer
I take advantage of first sale
and sell them, without the need of copyright permission?
Because to make them lawfully, you had to have permission and this was
given only conditionally. The conditions don't cease to exist once you
get your copy.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
choice. In the latter case, you had no permission to copy in the
first place.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Hasler wrote:
Tim Smith wrote:
The copies were pretty clearly made lawfully under GPL. I am
clearly the owner of the copies. So, why can't I take advantage
Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
Agreement is precedent to making copies.
No. The act of making copies (other than by downloading from online
distributor without I agree manifestation of assent prior to getting
copies, fair use, etc.) makes me
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The copies were pretty clearly made lawfully under GPL. I am clearly
the
owner of the copies. So, why can't I take advantage of first sale and
sell them, without the need
as any.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
Tim Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You can claim either agreement or non-agreement with the conditions.
Your choice. In the latter case, you had no permission to copy in the
first place.
Ah, but note that in my
awareness to a level that regulation sets in,
regulation that actually overrides that what most people would do on
their own.
Changing perception is an important first step for change to happen. It
is not tantamount to changing behavior, but behavior does not change all
on its own.
--
David
JohnF [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JohnF [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hadn't thought of that. But, on second thought now, I'd say,
let the best program win. If the commercial application is
truly better, maybe its superior functional specifications
Ciaran O'Riordan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Kastrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, this is a political question and a moral one.
It is, but people approach the ethical questions of labour and
software from different starting points.
Most people have thought about and discussed
the shark with that
analogy vis-a-vis free software.
For the record: plants are alive. So you equate vegetarians with
cannibals if you think that it is some way for arguing yourself out of
personal responsibility?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
the price of
purported GPL compliance just to have this nontestedness continue also
regarding their own products.
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never
stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and
neither do we.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr
or otherwise
or is this just a matter of winning an argument/making a point?
I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I would say that making a
point is an example of a vested interest.
In the case of rjack, bested interest would be more fitting.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
are interpreted not by Terekhov's
notions of sane, funny, crazy and drunk, but by the courts.
And actually, the courts are not really interested in whether you follow
the law for sane or for crazy reasons or out of pure coincidence.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
501 - 600 of 1030 matches
Mail list logo
