Re: GPL traitor !

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> Hyman Rosen wrote:
> [...]
>> > In Wallace v. FSF, the plaintiff claimed that the GPL covers collective
>> > works as you suggest...
>> 
>> I disagree that Wallace's claim was about collective works as I suggest.
>
> Try
>
> http://sco.tuxrocks.com/Docs/Wallace_v_FSF/Wallace_v_FSF-12.pdf

It's probably rather pointless to fight about what Wallace's claim was
about: even after several admonishments he was not able to actually
deliver something that was substantial enough to even count as a claim
in the eyes of the court.

If the judges weren't able to figure out a claim from that mess, the
laymen here should likely not bother.

-- 
David Kastrup