"David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
"amicus_curious" <[email protected]> writes:
"David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
The recipient of GPLed software is free to declare the GPL void and
revert to default copyright rules.
What is at issue today, though, is the nature of such "default
copyright rules". If there is no fee charged to use the work or to
redistribute the work, the copyright can be ignored unless the author
can show some degree of harm to himself.
Since when? If I send a personal letter to someone, I don't charge a
fee for it. He still is not authorized for redistributing my letter or
using its content in publications of his.
I don't see where that has any bearing on the issue, whether it is true or
not. If you send me a letter, I think that I am free to show it to anyone
as I see fit. Any set of words on a piece of paper do not qualify as a
"unique expression, fixed in a media".
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
