Andrew Dalke wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 9:16 PM, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> I can't be bothered to read the book, but if it's the book I think
>it is, then I already have read it and came to the conclusion that
>the author was blind.
[...]
> Read it for yourself, make sure you've got a copy of the GPL next
>you so you can *check* every reference he makes, and see if you come
>to the same conclusion I did, namely that the black letter of the
>GPL flatly contradicted the core assumption on which a large part of
>this book is based.
You haven't read it and you made that conclusion? It sounds like you
are promulgating hearsay and rumor. There's a free online copy which I
linked to, and if what you are saying is right then it should be easy
to point out some of the contradictions.
This part followed "if it's the book I think it is, then I already
have read it". Maybe the contradictions aren't in the part of the
book linked, but elsewhere in the book read. The link seemed to be to
a PDF of part of a book and Anthony W. Youngman wrote that he couldn't
be bothered to read it. Maybe a proper citation instead of a bare URL
would have helped avoid this confusion. (Line wraps would help too.)
Further, Anthony W. Youngman isn't the only debian-legal contributor
to think Larry Rosen's interpretations should not be taken wholesale,
nor the only one who can't give full citations because those
impressions were formed by interactions as much as literature. I'm
another and I'm pretty sure there are others.