Re: Attorney fees

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> So there are even business models around the GPL.
>
> LOL.
>
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/jun/10/busybox/bell-complaint.pdf
>
> "Thus, if a licensee redistributes a version of BusyBox, it may do so
> only under the terms of the
> License."
>
> only *only* *ONLY*

What about "a licensee" did you not understand?  The author himself (as
in the multiple-license example I gave) is certainly not bound by the
license.  Anyway, the terms of the license do not even demand that a
licensee do not distribute for profit.  They just stipulate that
whatever you distribute, has to be _licensed_ under the GPL at no
_additional_ cost.  So there are even business models for
redistributors.  They have to be competitive at their redistribution
business, and every recipient is a potential competitor.  That makes it
a market with tight margins, but tight is not the same as negative.

Anyway, you are rather stupid for cutting out an actual example, replace
it with LOL and quote something utterly unrelated.

But then it is not like you don't do that all the time.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum