On Mon, 5 Jan 2015 02:59:33 -0500 grarpamp <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote: > > Both restore rights that copyright otherwise restricts. > > No. Copyright exists automatically in default state of "all rights > reserved". No. Copyright is just a state-granted privilege. A part of the fake 'intellectual property' collection of 'rights'. > Any "restoration" you may wish or take for yourself > within that is an abuse of the author's rights as you have none. Any > rights to the author's work you may have are granted to you as the > author chooses. Subject to various limited notions... > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_safety_valves > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing > > > The GPL ensures that you are free to use the software even if you > > receive it from a third party. > > BSD doesn't do that. > > Yes it does. The author can slap BSD or GPL on it, give it to Alice > who gives it to Bob who gives it Carl who gives it to you which you > then "use". There's no difference between the two there. > > > Therefore BSD "grants" less freedom than the GPL. > > No it doesn't. This has already been explained. GPL people often > confuse freedom vs force(d open source redistribution), and permissive > vs restrictive. Don't get confused. > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_international_copyright_treaties > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_copyright > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-copyright > Yarr!
