Rjack wrote:
People are not supposed to believe their own eyes when they read the
> complaint and prayer for relief. Instead they are supposed to believe
> what some delusional GNU fan claims the SFLC *really* claims.
You have confused which side of this argument is delusional,
I'm afraid. The SFLC files suit as if the violating party has
simply chosen to infringe the copyrights of their clients.
If you would like to see what the SFLC *really* claims, it's easy
enough - read the web site of their clients:
<http://www.busybox.net/license.html>
Our enforcement efforts are aimed at bringing people into
compliance with the BusyBox license.
...
We don't want monetary awards, injunctions, or to generate bad
PR for a company, unless that's the only way to get somebody that
repeatedly ignores us to comply with the license on our code.
Are we supposed to believe the delusional rantings of GPL skeptics,
or the statements of the actual plaintiffs to the suit?
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
