Re: Fwd: reiser4 non-free?
Hans Reiser writes:
> MJ Ray wrote:
>
> > On 2004-05-04 18:47:02 +0100 Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Our licenses are free and not plagiarizable. GPL V2 is plagiarizable
> >> in the view of folks at debian who felt free to remove the credits.
> >
> >
> > Can someone give a conclusive statement of what actually happened? The
> > bug report 152547 looks like someone moved an advert into the docs
> > accompanying, rather than removed any attribution. Now, if you call
> > that advert "the credits" then I think you have a different view to
> > many people.
>
> Show me the line in those credits where it said "buy Coca-Cola cheaper
> here". They were credits, not advertisements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
...
And my lawyer asked 'People pay you money for this?'. Yup. Hee Hee.
Life is good. If you buy ReiserFS, you can focus on your value add
rather than reinventing an entire FS. You should buy some free software
too....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If these are credits, then Coca-cola is gpled. This is just _noise_,
spewed on each invocation.
>
> >
> > Their new condition clause 4, which says you cannot use their name,
> > even for accurate reporting. Normally, this would just be a false
> > statement, but this licence makes it a condition of the grant. I've
> > not seen that mistake committed by anyone else yet.
>
> Can you supply their full verbatim phrasing so that we can discuss it
> accurately? I'd like to understand whether your characterization is correct.
>
> >
> >> And call it a credit clause, not an advertising clause.
> >> Advertisements sell products, credits describe who made the project
> >> happen.
> >
> >
> > No, it is advertising for the XFree86 Project, Inc. In addition to
> > acknowledging their copyright (the credit), that advert may have to
> > appear.
> >
> You seem to understand the difference between credit and advertisement
> as advertisements are credits for those you dislike. If they are
> putting their name on their software or its documentation, then surely
> it is a credit not an advertisement.
Nikita.
Reply to: