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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Full text of GPL must be included

On 30 Nov 2000, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> John Galt <galt@inconnu.isu.edu> writes:
> > By law, what is not explicitly permitted is prohibited.  You are permitted
> > ONLY to make verbatim copies, you are not allowed to use it as a basis for
> > your own license because there is no explicit permission for it.  In fact
> > there is an explicit denial of the right to make any change at all to
> > it, one that is not delimited by further discussion, so is therefore
> > absolute by law.
> Copyright law does not extend so far; contracts in general are not
> copyrightable.

Please notice that what I posted was the copyright notice of the GPL.  Are
you saying that the header of the GPL is invalid?  Where a part of a
statement is proven wrong, the rest must be suspect, so why are we having
this discussion if the GPL itself may be invalid?
> Thomas

 Customer:  "I'm running Windows '98"      Tech: "Yes."      Customer:
   "My computer isn't working now."     Tech: "Yes, you said that."

Who is John Galt?  galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!

Reply to: