Re: "GPL requirement could have a chilling effectonderivativedistros"

[Stefaan A Eeckels]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:02:54 +0200
Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> wrote:

> 
> Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> [...]
> > > That's not what I'm saying. You purchase 500 copies, not one. You
> > > have a choice: 500 CDs in a box, or download-and-burn-yourself.
> > > You choose the later. How many times are you going to download?
> > 
> > If the ability to circumvent the GPL depends on first sale then
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Jumping to stupid conclusions like GNUtians? I thought you can do 
> better, Eeckels. You didn't answer the question. I'll take it that 
> since you're not total idiot (from what I gather), you are going to 
> download only one copy in the "purchase" scenario above. Your 
> production of 500 CDs would fall within implied license created by 
> law.

This is not about the law, but about honourable behaviour. It's quite
obvious what the author has in mind when making software available
under the GPL, and it's not someone looking for (real or perceived)
loopholes in the law.

Mind you, I can understand that you don't like the GPL, or people who
advocate its use, or even just use it. That's beside the point. If you
invoke first sale to avoid having to distribute copies you make under
the GPL (and let's not beat around the bush, that _is_ what you're
saying the strict reading of the law allows), you are going against the
explicit wishes of the author. In my book that's dishonourable. After
all, no-one forces you to use GPLed software.

> > you must obtain identifiably separate copies. In the case of a sale,
> > the receipt stating the number of copies should do. In the case of a
> > free download, you should be able to prove that you downloaded the
> 
> Free as in what? The price doesn't matter. And free as in GNU Republic
> is beside the point as long as I've done nothing to accept it. And
> implied license doesn't count as acceptance. Suppose I downloaded it
> from online shop of my friend. And even paid something.

Fine, then you can prove you have a lawful copy, and exercise your
right of first sale. I've no problem with that. Just don't go and copy
that copy on the pretext you're into saving bandwidth.

> [...]
> > I, for one, will never ever consider doing business with you. You
> > cannot be trusted to honour an agreement.
> 
> I feel sorry for you. Turn on your brain.

I know, being dishonest can be very enticing - you get a lot of things
you'd otherwise have to do without. Your posts show your character, and
because my brain is switched on :), I know I should avoid having
anything more to do with you than penning an occasional answer to a
Usenet post.

Cheers,

-- 
Stefaan A Eeckels
-- 
Isn't it amazing how a large number of evil morons can give the
appearance of being a single evil genius?          --Mel Rimmer