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

Re: LPPL and source-less distribution

How can a text get lost? Hmpf.

* Michael ::

> On 6/14/05, Bernhard R. Link <brlink@debian.org> wrote:
> > * Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> [050613 21:21]:
> > > C'mon, Raul.  The "crack-smoking GPL" refers to an
> > > interpretation ("non-contract license", "functional use
> > > results in a derivative work") that I and others have
> > > demonstrated to have no basis in law [...]
> > 
> > You have expressed this your opinion multiple times. I think
> > your increasing use of words like words and phrases like
> > "crack-smoking", "deceitful" etc make a good point about how
> > 'convincing' your demonstrations were.
> Increasing?  Not particularly.  If it really bothers you, I'm
> happy to drop "crack-smoking", and say I am
> "pro-GPL-as-an-instrument-of law".  But with respect to "deceit":
> Eben Moglen has engaged for years in deceit about the nature of
> copyright law and licenses.  I see no reason not to call it by its
> name.

You know I agree with you in many things, but I see one reason:
Diplomacy. With a capital D. The FSF holds the copyright interest
and is responsible for developing and  publicizing of a lot of free
software; even if your (harsh) word is accurate, IMHO it would be
more polite any of: "error", "mistaken position", "propaganda"

HTH, Always,

Reply to: