Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
>
> rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [...]the license is preempted by 17 USC sec 301.[...]
>
> [... ]invalidating the GPL would be worth billions to some companies,
Sez who? Why's that? I doubt that rjack wants money paid to anyone for
official and final invalidation of the GPL.
The courts should simply not enforce invalid contracts. LAW 101. To
date, the courts did NOT enforce the GPL. And violations flourish.
"We currently have 185 open tickets (i.e. reported GPL violations) at
gpl-violations.org"
-- The GNU Monk Harald Welte
The GPL is unenforceable inspite of all those "Selling Brooklyn Bridge"
complaints from Aaron K. Williamson (AW1337) et. al. and their blog and
press release "settlements."
regards,
alexander.
--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
