On Mon, 09 Oct 2006, Francesco Poli wrote: > OK, but reaffirming the literal meaning of DFSG#2 now does not help > a future discussion where the DFSG will hopefully be changed to > unambiguously affect all works (both programmatic and > non-programmatic).
It doesn't help or hinder it; discussions about what changes to the DFSG should be made or the nature of future discussions about those changes are just totally out of its scope. (And in the latter case, totally out of the scope of any GR.) [If it's too difficult to separate considering what a text currently says versus considering what one wishes it said, there's not much I can do to help.] Don Armstrong -- The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion ... refutes its thesis far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's labored effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight has all the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by sitting on it--and is just as likely to succeed. -- Alex Kozinski in Silveira V Lockyer http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
