Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled

[RJack]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> wrote:
>
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
>
> > > On 2/22/2010 1:13 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > > Hyman, please formulate what is "enforceable copyright
> > > > condition", ...
>
> > > Copying and distributing without permission from the rights
> > > holders, with such permission expressed in the license they may
> > > offer.
>
> > Hyman, why^W you're retardedly jumping to the conclusion bypassing
> > the analysis of condition v. covenant v. scope restriction
> > conundrum, why?
>
> Perhaps because that's such an arcane, fine distinction that he's no
> more interested in it than the judges were who judged Jacobsen vs.
> Katzer. What matters is that the terms and conditions in the GPL are
> legally valid, and have now been tested in an appeals court in the
> United States of America.

Ummm... The Artistic license is now abbreviated "GPL". Hmm...

Alan is a poet and using poetic license...

ROFL. ROFL. ROFL.

Sincerely,
RJack