Re: GPL question

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 01:44:05PM +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:29:40PM +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > > ROFL. Hey dak, you know that your theory of user linking (when
> > > > there is no "library with compatible interface") creating "acting as
> > > > your agent" liability is utter nonsense and only totally lobotomized
> > > > GNUtians take it seriously, don't you? Just curious.
> > >
> > > Hey Alex,
> > >
> > > Why don't you get a Shared Source license and test your theories and
> > > then mail Stevie Balmer?
> >
> > What exactly do you want me to test and then mail Stevie Balmer,
> > dear mini-RMS?
> 
> Your theories. Go sell copies of Windows that you make.

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/sharedsource/licensing/windows.mspx

Quick inspection revealed that Windows shared source licenses do not
grant rights of reproduction and/or adaptation of Windows (apart from 
17 USC 117 defaults, that is).

You can't compare it to GPL (or Ms-PL/RL for this matter) with its 
broad scope of granted rights (all rights are granted).

Now please mail this message to Stevie Balmer yourself, mini-RMS.

regards,
alexander.

--
"The revolution might take significantly longer than anticipated."

                                     -- The GNU Monk Harald Welte