Re: Licensing question about the BSD

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 00:41 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > The FSF is not talking about giving (or selling or whatever) your copy
> > (read first sale), but copy distribution.
> 
> Under FSF's "GPL-is-not-a-contract" theory

How is it not a theory? You don't have to click any "I Agree" on GNU GPL
software. If you happen to find any program that forces you to click "I
Agree" to install and use then file a bug with the developers.

It's only

> , all copies of publicly 
> available GPL'd works fall under "copy distribution" 

that have conditions.

> pursuant to the 
> first sale because 

First sale immediately implies that you loose your copy on the act of
giving it to someone else, either commercially or not. Giving "a copy of
what you have" (copy distribution) is different than giving "what you
have" (first sale).

> they are "lawfully made" and there's no contract 
> that would restrict (impose enforceable conditions) on their 
> distribution.

Of course. There's no contract from the beginning. The GNU GPL is an
unilateral grant of rights, some of them with conditions. Nothing else
will give you certain rights granted by it, because the law's default is
not to give them.

Please stop deliberately lying.

Rui

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part