[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

From: Thufir Hawat
Subject: Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:52:11 GMT
User-agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:35:04 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:

> "Thufir Hawat" <> wrote in message
> news:9psol.15170$Si4.8455@newsfe22.iad...
>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:55:44 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:
>>>> The mere fact that you are distributing the software (usually the
>>>> binaries, or as firmware) requires the distributor to make the source
>>>> (and the very *same* source for the binaries) available. Failing to
>>>> do so will put the distributor at odds with copyright law
>>> No shit, Dick Tracy.  I simply say that is silly.
>> And if the source isn't available then where's the attribution?  At a
>> minimum, sounds like plagiarism.
> Only if you don't know the meaning of the term.

How can not attributing source *which you downloaded*, and then choose to 
distribute in binary *not*, at least ethical, require attribution?


reply via email to

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