Re: Licensing question about the BSD

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:46 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> If you mean the omission of the rest of Moglens gospel... well,
> 
> "The defendant can then either agree that he has no permission,"
> 
> Objection. I have permission (unilateral grant) to reproduce.
... under certain conditions.

> "in which case he loses, or assert that his permission is the GPL,"
> 
> Copies are lawfully made pursuant to the GPL's unilateral grant 
> to reproduce.
... under certain conditions.


> "in which case he must show that he is obeying its terms."
> 
> No. You must show that copies are not lawfully made.

If they don't follow the copy conditions, they are unauthorized.

> "A defendant cannot simultaneously assert that the GPL is valid 
>  permission for his distribution"
> 
> I accept plaintiff's position that the GPL conveys valid 
> *unilateral* grant to reproduce.
... under certain conditions.

You're a robot troll, answering again and again as if reacting to
certain string tokens with the same logic-void arguments.

Regards.

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part