Re: GPL traitor !

[Thufir Hawat]

On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:57:50 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> Thufir Hawat <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Sat, 09 May 2009 10:52:41 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> They would clearly like not to have copyright apply to this situation,
>>> since then they would not need the GPL to provide its copyleft
>>> mechanism there.
>>
>> Without copyright the GPL is pointless.
> 
> Without an attack, a defense is pointless.


Nope.  The GPL rests upon the existence of copyright law, ie:  without 
copyright law there can be no GPL.  A burglar alarm is a defense without 
an attack, it's a precaution.  Or, would you say that a burglar alarm is 
pointless because no burglar is lurking about?  Or, a password on 
computer?  etc, etc.


-Thufir