Re: Combining proprietary code and GPL for in-house use
JESUS H CHRIST ON A POGO STICK!!!! WHAT is your major malfuction? It's
not good enough for you to start on your "John Galt's not part of Debian"
kick, but you now have to start on others?! I have some suggestions for
the horse you rode in on: I have serious doubts as to whether you're
physically capable of the acts I'd require of you. Next time I see this
shit, I'm going to have a long talk with the Tech Comittee and DPL: this
is out of line and I've a feeling most people know it. Keep slinging your
stones at me, twit, because everyone else here is too good for the likes
of you.
On 27 Jun 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>"none" <chloehoffman@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> I have trouble seeing how the separate distribution of A and B and then the
>> end-user combining them is infringement by either the distributor or the
>> end-user. Assuming that neither A nor B includes code from each other, then
>> A is not a derivative work of B nor is B a derivative work of A and so they
>> are not derivative works distributed under the GPL which would trigger the
>> incompatibility issue for the distributor.
>
>It sounds like your goal is to subvert the GPL, in which case you are
>not our friend. If your goal is to try and figure out ways that bad
Au contraire. Subversion of licenses is fair: look at the OpenSSL debate
(round 1, a few months ago). I didn't notice you playing
hypo^H^H^H^Hnetiquette nazi then... As for friendship: Hoffman may take a
couple of tries to get the gist of the argument, but is much more
salvagable than you. At least Hoffman can bring westlaw's light into
things: all you're good for is smoke and not knowing what the DFSG is (who
in HELL signed your key without you knowing what the DFSG was anyway?).
>people might subvert the GPL, so that the FSF can fix them, then you
>should bring such issues up in private with the FSF. Bringing them up
When did Debian get reattached to the FSF? Why should Debian care what
the FSF thinks (other than as much as Debian should care about any Open
Source source [pun intended])?
>in public, on a list where they will never reach the relevant people,
>serves only to help those people who want to subvert the GPL.
>
>However, regardless of your motives, this discussion isn't appropriate
>for debian-legal.
Neither is netiquette-nazism, but this is the umpteenth message that
you've sent today on the subject.
>Thomas
>
>
>
>
--
I can be immature if I want to, because I'm mature enough to make my own
decisions.
Who is John Galt? galt@inconnu.isu.edu
Reply to: