On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 05:20:09AM -0600, John Galt wrote: > >> 2) the group/readme > > > >If there is no legal problem with this, it's better (because it's less of > >a hassle!) > > I'm thinking it could be construed as a DBA.
?
> >Don't you still have to notify everyone? What if some people cannot be
> >contacted? Must notice be served in any particular manner or does an
> >email count? (This is what worries me in the first place..)
>
> Written notice (basically court service). As far as "cannot be
> contacted", if publishing in the paper's enough for service on the
> Defendant, I'm sure it should be good enough for a potential Plaintiff.
I don't have access to newspapers in foriegn continents. ;) But I get
the idea.
> >Anyway, I'm not sure everyone is going to be interested in taking that
> >risk, and I'm not sure I blame them.
>
> No, I can't either. But I'd be remiss if I didn't at least tell you about
> it.
Well supposedly SPI already exists for this purpose, however SPI and
Debian both cower in fear from the mere potential of a cease-and-desist
letter because someone got the bright idea that one might be possible
under a silly US currently law being actively challenged which most legal
scholars have already condemned as unconstitutional. Given that,
At this point, I don't have any dillusions that SPI has the desire nor the
ability to defend itself from a $5 small claims suit, let alone initiate
legal proceedings on behalf of someone else in defense of the GPL.
> >> 5) assign rights to a trusted third party or a third party that all agree
> >> should recieve them.
> >
> >And this is even riskier.
>
> True enough. The risk is usually outweighed by the intangibles associated
> with the third party. If they aren't free software zealots, perhaps some
> other charity like the local church or something.
I can just envision being able to declare it sinful to violate the GPL.
It would throw a few BSD guys I know into fits. ;) Definite potential
there just for the sake of watching them sputter about the evils of GNU
for an hour or so. =D
--
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Free software developer
<Thoth_> Yeah, well that's why it's numbered 2.3.1... it's for those of us
who miss NT-like uptimes
pgpS57ECb44kp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
