On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 23:27:50 +0100, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Isaac wrote: > [...] >> It's not a mistake. Preaching the gospel of first sale according to >> Alexander >> appears to be a life mission. > > http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/e123816845315e68 > ><quote authors=Jeffrey Siegal, Isaac> > >>What about the first sale doctrine? Indeed, if users own their own >>copies, including binary copies, of the software, than those users can >>transfer those copies without complying with the GPL's requirements as >>to source code access. > > Interesting. I really hadn't thought about that and my attempts > to digest the implications on the fly are making my head hurt. > I can't resolve the problems introduced by first sale without > either making the user of GPL'd code a non owner or deciding > that users really can transfer their copies, no matter what the > GPL says. > > Gotta think about this. Kinda makes my whole argument moot > if GPL users are really licensees. <g> > > Isaac
The implications you draw from first sale go way beyond this Alexander. In any event, we've discussed ways of resolving this particular conundrum in misc.int-property. Your pretense that the quoted statement is my last word on the topic is quite disingenuous. I have not found you that way in the past. Isaac > ></quote> > > regards, > alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
