You've repeatedly said that GPL is "less free". You've argued that the GPL "should" do things that it doesn't do, such as
> Should the FSF feel compelled to go sue GitHub? > if you distribute laptops or servers that have a mixture of pre-installed GPL and non-GPL binaries, that is also a violation. > Mixing GPL and non-GPL binaries inside a VM is a violation of the GPL. (If you distribute the VM.) > Dell and HP selling laptops with ubuntu pre-installed? ... > Now how about if I store something in Amazon S3. ... You also said something about zip files should be a violation, but I must have missed it when looking back for the above snippets. In other words, you assert some ridiculous things that the GPL does *not* do but that you want it to do. I can't imagine any reason you'd desire the GPL to exhibit such silly behavior other than to bolster your assertion that the GPL is "less free". On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) <[email protected]>wrote: > > From: John Abreau [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Describe a bunch of things that the GPL > > doesn't do, assert that the GPL *should* do those things, > > Name anything I said that even remotely fits that description. > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email [email protected] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
