Rjack wrote:
There go the goalposts! You wish to minimize my assertion. Let me repeat. "The GPL is unenforceable under U.S. copyright law".
If you are correct (which you are not) then there will one day appear a case which demonstrates this. Until then, we (that is, those of us who are not you) will go on believing that one either fully abides by the GPL or one does not get to copy and distribute. No halfsies. So far, no plaintiff in a GPL enforcement suit has gone to judgment making your claims. Instead, they have all chosen to comply with the GPL. Furthermore, presumed foes of GPLed software such as Microsoft are careful to keep their wares separate from GPLed code, again not choosing to argue as you do. I suppose I want to minimize your assertion. Even if you are correct in some abstract sense (which you are not), what difference does it make when no one listens to you and everyone behaves as if the GPL works exactly as you claim it does not? The FSF doesn't have the goal of proving that the GPL is enforceable, they have the goal of giving users the freedom to run, read, modify, and share their software. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
