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

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

Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean


From: JEDIDIAH
Subject: Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 08:38:24 -0500
User-agent: slrn/0.9.8.1pl1 (Debian)

On 2009-04-06, Rjack <address@hidden> wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> On 2009-04-06, amicus_curious <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> "JEDIDIAH" <address@hidden> wrote in message 
>>> news:address@hidden
>>>
>>>>> GPL license offerers are much more akin to homeowners who are trying
>>>>> to rip off their invited guests by tempting them to accept an illegal
>>>>> contract.
>>>>   Nice self-nuke on your part there...
>>>>
>>>>   You either have a legal contract or you are tresspassing.
>>>>
>>> I don't think that you understood the analogy.  Let me put it in what might 
>>> be a more understandable form.  Say you go to Chicago for the Open Source 
>>> Expo and you and your buddies, being new to the big city, are wandering up 
>>> State Street and get enticed into a titty bar.  Then some sweet honeys cozy 
>>> up to you and ask you to buy them a drink.  "Sure!", you say, flattered by 
>>> such attention.  Then later you find that the tab for the girls' drinks are 
>>> not what you expected and are some $50 apiece.  "Pay up or we will call the 
>>> cops!" is what you are told.
>>>
>>> Now that is more akin to the way that unsophisticates are lured into using 
>>> the "free" GPL code and then are hammered for their birthright by the SFLC. 
>>> "Ignorance is no excuse!", they say, "What's yours is now ours, you have 
>>> been touched!" 
>> 
>> ...except the GPL is very plain and out in the open.
>> 
>> The intent of RMS is very clear and rather blunt.
>> 
>> The only way you can "misunderstand" anything is if it were
>> your original intent to try and "take advantage" to begin with.
>> 
>> The terms are by no stretch of the imagination hidden.
>> 
>> Neither is the intent of the proprietor.
>> 
>
> Boldness and clarity of purpose does not make that purpose legal.

...then the whole situation reverts to "straight property law".

You're attempt to have it both ways just wont fly.

-- 
    Microsoft: Because the world doesn't have enough peasants.        |||
                                                                     / | \


reply via email to

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