Defender of the GPL

TalkBack 44 of 136:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

RE: You are unable to think.

"Perhaps but I read about it a lot. Must be others making it up
also. No, but they can show their disapproval and clear it up for
all."

And yet you cannot provide one link about it or a single clause
from any version of the GPL which says it. Hmm...

"I purchased fenced goods in good faith. They were confiscated.
You are dreaming here. You have to show that you didn't
infringe in an investigation. Good faith doesn't cut it here."

Hi, let me introduce you to the difference between theft and
copyright infringement. Now that we've all met ... receiving a
copyrighted work in good faith does not mean you infringed
anyone's copyright. It may mean you will be enjoined from
further enjoying the use of that copyrighted work but, wait a
second, LOOK, THAT'S WHAT I ALREADY SAID!

"Open source needs to. They are the ones that want to GPL
everything that comes into contact with their code. So put the
clause in and be more specific."

My god you don't give up. How can I spell this out for you? A
license can't cause you to commit an illegal act. So, by
definition, there is no need for it. But, I'm sure you've got some
lawer you can link to who says you need such a clause right?

"Only here and there. Not mainstream use. Probably the older
firmware had unverified source in it and they are playing it safe.
Plus there was a demand for it. The new firmware will have a
verified source."

So the Linksys router wasn't mainstream use? But there was
enough demand for it that they're keeping it? I'll let you argue
that one out with yourself for now and when you figure out what
your position is, come back and let me know. And, what exactly
is, "unverified source"?

"But all those stories about proprietory houses ripping off the
GPL is is is BS. Maybe one or two done you dirt but the rest is
just stories."

Oh, so all the violations listed here: http://gpl-violations.org/
are just made up. Thanks for clearing up my mistake. But you
might want to contact all the companies which complied with
the cease and desists they were sent since they were, according
to you, not doing anything wrong. And, WAIT JUST A MINUTE, I
thought you said youcouldn't even sue someone if you used the
GPL. HOW DARE they prove you wrong again.

"Yet. Also do you know that for a fact? Probably ripped off by a
rogue programmer for a knowledge base."

Here, try using Google: http://www.google.com/search?
client=safari&rls=en&q=cisco+ios+source
+stolen&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8. Why do you feel the need to
comment on things that you are 100% completely unaware of?

"Yes, IP was mentioned in the constitution. I will mail you a copy
since you need it."

No, IP wasn't mentined in the constitution. Copyright, however,
was. Your "constitutionally correct" comment is still hysterical.

Please post again soon, you're providing at least 25% of my
amusement for the day.

Posted by: rhavyn   Posted on: 01/20/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now
• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now