Re: Question about the GPL copyright noticeandthestatementofcopying permission not being included in allthesourcefiles of aproduct.

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:

[... freedoms blah-blah ...]

> it is immoral

THIS is immoral:

http://www.tlug.jp/docs/rms.html

<quote>

HY: Hmmm. Then tell me what you think about pirated software. 

RMS: I don't call this copying "piracy", because that is a propaganda 
word. I don't think it is wrong to copy and share information. 
Governments can pass laws against it, but that does not make it wrong, 
just illegal. 

An unauthorized copy of a proprietary program has the same drawbacks 
as an authorized copy. If you want to make more copies and share them, 
you have to do it in secret; and you cannot get the source code. 

So I think that unauthorized copies are not much better than 
authorized copies. The only good thing about the unauthorized copy is 
that you avoid giving money to the owner. This is good, because the 
owner does not deserve a reward for making software proprietary. 

</quote>

BTW, if you're so "moral", why hide anything?

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5217006.html
http://www.idg.com.sg/idgwww.nsf/0/93CDEF68C07A3E9E48256E9B002217EF?OpenDocument

My, this is fun:

<quote>

We will not betray our legally protected confidences, particularly 
when they relate to our work upholding the integrity of the GPL 
(GNU General Public License).

</quote>

regards,
alexander.