Re: GPL v3 Draft
On 17 Jan 2006 11:28:14 -0500, Michael Poole <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I understand that you are willing to and have posted totally
> irrelevant regulations as support for claims that you provide no
> direct or plausible indirect support for.
Well, I was just hinting at disbarring Moglen.
> I understand that the page you quote there is not specific as to why
> it is "a US legal mandate", and so it is consistent with Dr Moglen's
> claim that no one seems to know why it is done that way.
Same answer as to "why the copyright act defines "derivative work"
not as in the GNU GPL". Go ask Moglen.
Seriously, if it's not in some statute, I suspect that there was some
court ruling or two.