On Monday 18 June 2007 15:09:47 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
I don't know if I have the right. None of the code is mine - the fact that
they are in violation of the license is not in question (I trust your word on
this), but it is the licensor who has the right to press charges. (I will
check with the lawyers and law professionals I know, because the GPL makes no
statements about the legal jurisdiction under which violations will be tried.
It might be that I actually can file suit under Brazillian law)
Bad word choice on my part. Of course you are correct.
Okay. So its possible to change whats running on the hardware - but even
though nobody has the information needed to do it, it's a violation. Hrm... I
can see some valid reasoning behind this, but it'll take creative legalese to
make sure that things like (EE)PROMS are properly covered.
"Effectively" - yes, that is the perfect way to describe it. And even though
it isn't directly part, a situation like that should be covered. (In other
words, if this was the way the "tivoization" section was written to make
this "effectively part of the work" bit the focus a lot of my objections to
it would be nullified. Give me a few hours to work on some solid and
unambiguous language and I'll send something your way for review)
Agreed. As Linus pointed out, we've been arguing over opinions and that's
pointless. The only thing to do when someone states an opinion is to nod and
accept it.
Perhaps. I haven't looked into the specific regulations in over a year, so my
memory may be failing me entirely.
Okay. I think that someone pointed out a problem with the "optional grant"
idea, but I can't remember the specifics and don't feel like digging through
the 500 or so posts that make up this discussion.
If this is your opinion, then run with it. My opinion on the matter is the
opposite - that the GPLv2 does the job in a better way - but, well, that's my
opinion. (and like my mother used to say - "Opinions are like assholes.
Everyone has one, and the only one that doesn't stink is your own.")
I didn't say it was "the goal", I said "one of the goals". I'm the first to
admit when I'm wrong, but in this case I've read interviews with RMS where he
has said that one of the reasons he founded the FSF was to marginalize
proprietary software. (No, I don't know where this was - the interview was
done several years ago)
DRH
--
Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.
-
