gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: More FSF hypocrisy


From: Thufir Hawat
Subject: Re: More FSF hypocrisy
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 07:21:32 GMT
User-agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:41:15 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:

> "Thufir Hawat" <address@hidden> wrote in message
> news:address@hidden
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:17:58 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>>>> If EULA are contracts, what makes the GPL different from other EULA,
>>>> in your view?
>>>>
>>> It is not any different at all.  Both are contracts.
>>>
>>> Now, what do you think happens when such a contract is breached?
>>
>>
>> IANAL, are you?
>>
>>
> Do you think that it would matter much to you?  Certainly there are many
> lawyers who disparage the GPL and there are at least a few who think it
> is a wonderful thing.  Will you only listen to lawyers who agree with
> your emotional interests or would you change your mind if a lawyer told
> you that you were wrong?  If a lawyer really isn't enough, would you
> believe a judge? The only problem there is that there are judges on both
> sides of the issue, too.   If you ANAL, what are you ever to do?


I would give your words more weight on these legalisms were you to claim 
to be a lawyer.  So far as I can tell this thought process lumps the GPL 
in with all other EULA on the one hand, and then differentiates on the 
other, but only when convenient.  In all of the postings I've seen no 
reason to treat the GPL differently from other EULA -- violation, 
ignoring it, whatever, results in being charged/sued/whatever with 
copyright infringement.  Just like other EULA's, right?


-Thufir


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]