home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
- Path: sparky!uunet!blaze.cs.jhu.edu!jyusenkyou!arromdee
- From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
- Subject: Re: Fund raising at the FSF
- Message-ID: <1993Jan11.215534.27348@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>
- Sender: news@blaze.cs.jhu.edu (Usenet news system)
- Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
- References: <726553525snx@crynwr.com> <1993Jan9.211106.22282@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> <1isogrINN3k3@early-bird.think.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:55:34 GMT
- Lines: 23
-
- In article <1isogrINN3k3@early-bird.think.com> barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
- >>I now decide to write C, which also uses subroutine S. If I take S from A,
- >>C is infected with the GPL. If I take S from B, C is not.
- >>Yet the two copies of S are still identical, byte for byte. I'm stuck; any
- >>third party can say "oh, you just took S from the GPL program. So C falls
- >>under the GPL, so I can copy C". Can _this_ happen and is _this_ intended?
- >Just because he thinks it came from the GPL program doesn't make it so.
- >I don't think someone receiving C can sue you over this, as there is no
- >contract between you and he that says anything about source availability.
-
- No, no, it's not the party receiving C who sues. It's my competitor who
- copies. "You took it from C" is just my competitor's excuse for pirating my
- work. _I_ have to sue _him_; his possession of the excuse "well, he took it
- from C, so it's GPLed and freely copyable" is his defense against my claim
- that he pirated my stuff.
- --
- "On the first day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Leftover Turkey!
- On the second day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Turkey Casserole
- that she made from Leftover Turkey.
- [days 3-4 deleted] ... Flaming Turkey Wings! ...
- -- Pizza Hut commercial (and M*tlu/A*gic bait)
-
- Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
-