Fwd: [linux-elitists] Wow, M$ is even more evil than I thought

Heather star@betelgeuse.starshine.org
Tue Apr 3 00:23:14 PDT 2001


> > OTOH, reality does, since US is really a study in case law, and if they 
> > took it to court, a holder of The Random Chunk of Source Code could clearly
> > state that they are propogating their own adjusted copy (derivitive works
> > are vehemently createble, according to GPL) -
> 
> But derivation is a copyright right just as much as distribution
> (well, almost); I don't know why you could take back permission for
> one and not the other.
> 
> > The smart Chain Yanking Tune-Changer would make it clear the provisions
> > of GPL (subsection mentioned elsewhere) make it clear that if one holder
> > denies access, all derivates must cease distribution.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> The reason licenses might not be perpetual even when they have no
> particular term is that licenses to do things with real and personal
> property can generally be revoked.  And a promise without exchange of
> consideration is also not usually legally enforceable.  Some people
> say that distribution itself, or bug reports, or development, is a
> form of consideration, but there is an objection that there no
> "privity of contract" there.
> Privity is a term of art I don't quite understand.  But it's something
> you don't have in most software licensing, whether proprietary or
> free.

Well, got me, I don't know the term either.

> > The point of the FSF thing is to (1) make it really really clear who the
> > singular copyright holder is, this makes it easier to establish clear cases,
> > (2) to thus allow FSF's horde of lawyers to stand up for the code, and 
> > (political, definitely unmentioned, but likely a very important reason
> > from the RMS point of view) since the original author is no longer the
> > holder, the original author can't revoke the license, and the FSF overall
> > intends to maintain the GPL, which then lets the original author plus
> > multitude more, continue to bang on the code, ad insanitum.
> 
> "ad insanitatem", probably, although that connotes illness more than
> madness; maybe "ad dementiam"?

Actually, I suspect I've met my needs exactly, since "till it drives you
nuts" or "until you're sick of it" are both connoted easily.

And, I think that I've declined it incorrectly -
	Ad nausea
fits the space, therefore Ad dementia, I think.

* Heather * Different all twisty a of in maze are you, passages little.



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list