Re: Wallace's reply brief

[Ferd Burfel]

"Ferd Burfel" <ferd@burfel.net> wrote in message 
news:r1aAg.17644$%7.6438@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Alexander Terekhov" <terekhov@web.de> wrote in message 
> 44D05746.919A1DAA@web.de">news:44D05746.919A1DAA@web.de...
>>
>> Ferd Burfel wrote:
>
> Something like the way no third-party can avoid being bound by the terms 
> of the GPL in order to receive permission to modify and distribute GPLed 
> code? Is Wallace really helping his case by mentioning this?

Unless.....

Is Wallace implying that the GPL is somehow illegal because it places 
restrictions on TRUE "non-parties" because it says they can't modify and 
distribute the code unless they accept it's terms?

Surely not.  MS says you can't even USE their software (much less modify and 
distribute it) unless you agree to the terms of the license, while the GPL 
doesn't have that restriction, making MS's license more restrictive to 
"non-parties" in that respect.