Re: GPL and other licences

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   You are not a licensee, as you are not the owner of the copy.  So the
   GPL language does not apply to you when it says "you".

Since I'm in the lawful posession of the copy, I'm am allowed to
accept the GPL.  Section 0, section 1 (since you are to lazy to read
the GPL) also applies.

   It says no such thing.  The complete section 0 is

         0. This License applies to any program or other work which
       contains a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may
       be distributed under [...]

I suggest you continue reading section 1, 2 and 3.  If you are going
to quote things, read the bit you quote.

Nothing of what I have written is wrong.  It is stated _explcitly_ in
the license.

   Without ownership of a physical copy, there is no licensee.

Once again, I do NOT have to be the owner of the CD to accept the
license.

   There is nothing in section 0 that declares anybody coming across code
   a licensee, and indeed that would be frivolous.

For the sake of my own sanity, I'll give you this.  Section 1 state
it.

  1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
     source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you

I recived the source code from my employeer.  I get the right to copy
and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code in any
medium (provided I do some stuff which I didn't quote here).

   The terms of the license apply to the licensee, not every bystander.
   You are not a licensee.

Since I recived the source code, *I*AM*IN*FACT*THE*LICENSEE*.  The GNU
General Public License version 2 explcicly states this.