[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: IBM's appellee brief in Wallace case

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: IBM's appellee brief in Wallace case
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:09:06 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> > "And a copy made under a license retains the license obligations."
>> >
>> > is quite telling.
>> Read a dictionary.  "Keep in place" is perfectly acceptable definition
> Which place, dak? And what puts it in place to begin with? And recall 
> that your GNUtian authority comrade moron Moglen postulates that "a 
> license is a unilateral permission, not an obligation." So did you 
> check it with him? Party line, and all that, you know.

It is a unilateral permission, but not without preconditions.  Making
use of that permission requires heeding obligations spelled out in the

You really are grasping at straws again.  Can't you find a less silly
way to spend your time?

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]