On 2009-12-18, Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hadron wrote:
>>
>> Alan Mackenzie <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > In gnu.misc.discuss Hadron <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Didn't Alan boldly claim that the GPL was "easy to understand"?
>> >
>> > Yes. The GPL is very easy to understand. It's USA copyright law which
>> > is hard.
>> >
>> > The only people who find the GPL hard are those who seek a legal means of
>> > violating it.
>>
>> And just about everyone that ever uses it, reads it or discusses it. I
>> find it amazing that you keep insisting it is so easy and yet we see you
>> embroiled in nitpicking over meaning time and time again. You're either
>> very thick skinned or in denial.
>
> Note that even Pee Jay has admitted that
>
> "a lot of people don't understand the GPL, including some lawyers"
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031214210634851
So? Some lawyers aren't terribly good at contract law in general
despite this is one of those things they even cover in law school.
[deletia]
--
The social cost of suing/prosecuting individuals |||
for non-commercial copyright infringement far outweighs / | \
the social value of copyright to begin with.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
