Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
John Hasler wrote:
David Kastrup writes:
It would not seem like a particularly important "victory".
I think it is an obvious and predictable victory, but still an
important one as it has a court establishing that the GPL is
_not_ the same as public domain. This is obvious, but many
trolls have asserted that it is so loudly and so frequently for
so many years that they have actually convinced many members of
the public.
Wow, I an unaware of those loud and frequent "troll" arguments
claiming that GPL licensed code is public domain. Could you
provide links to some of those arguments?
Easy enough using Google groups search.
For example, try
Message-Id: <24udnZdWR4cqqxrVnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
from a certain "Rjack" troll.
I quote:
I couldn't agree more about distributing illegally and violateing
an *enforceable* copyright license.
An illegal toilet-paper license like the GPL is a whole 'nuther
story. An now for the rest of the story. . .