Re: license issue: calling a GPLv2 library

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> 
> > Oh dear dak...
> >
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> >>
> >> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> >>
> >> > David Kastrup wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> >> The GPL does not demand _anything_ as long as you are not using
> >> >> _others'_ property licensed under the GPL.  And then _their_ property
> >> >> rights chip in, and they are perfectly allowed to give you license
> >> >
> >> > Except that the GPL blatantly misstates the scope of property rights
> >> > under copyright. It pretends that both 17 USC 109 and 117 are simply
> >> > nonexistent (true in the GNU Republic). Then comes the issue of price
> >> > fixing at predatory ("no charge") level of pooled IP in derivative
> >> > and collective works.
> >>
> >> You are babbling.  This sort of babbling constitutes so little in way
> >> of a coherent argument that it has already been thrown out of court
> >> (remember Wallace?) in spite of your gleeful appreciation of it.
> >
> > I'm in good company. http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise2.html
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/a3f76440df6b36c1
> > http://groups.google.com/group/misc.int-property/msg/4d2438aa5d80f803
> >
> > And as for Wallace (his other case is under appeal now), to quote
> > Hollaar:
> >
> > (http://groups.google.com/group/misc.int-property/msg/4d2438aa5d80f803)
> >
> > ------
> > There has been some mention in this newsgroup in the past about the
> > antitrust suit in Indiana regarding the GPL (Daniel Wallace v. Free
> > Software Foundation, Inc.).
> 
> [...]
> 
> Get your attributions right.  The above message by Hollaar contains
> nothing from what you pretend to quote.

I meant 

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.int-property/msg/53225114939815b8

I've referred to
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.int-property/msg/4d2438aa5d80f803
twice. This one shows Moglens ignorance. And Stallmans obsession with
redefinition of things.

------
The convenient redefinition of things in the GPL reminds me of a
quote from Abraham Lincoln:
     How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?
     Four.  Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. 
------

regards,
alexander.