[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:32:12 +0100

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Q: Am I bound by the GPL, by merely downloading, without affirmatively
> > accepting the GPL, yes or no?
> No.
> > Suppose that right now I've made a hardcover copy of a work
> > affirmatively made available to me (I've affirmatively accepted the
> > license contract) under the license to make only paperback copies.
> >
> > Q: Am I violating the scope of the license by making hardcover copies
> > instead of (agreed) paperbacks only?
> Yes.
> > What does this have to do with the GPL, Hyman?
> You can't make copies of GPLed code and convey those copies
> to others unless you do so under the terms of the GPL. 

You're mistaken, Hyman. 17 USC 109.

Click here:


You, sweetie. :-)


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

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