On 2009-12-18, Hadron <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Peter Köhlmann <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> 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.
>>
>> "Nitpicking" are the cretins like Rjack or Alex T
>> They are either too thick to understand simple concepts, or they don't
>> want to "understand" to keep on trolling
>>
>> The GPL *is* simple to understand. That *you* are unable to is not
>> surprising. You would not understand the simplest of things
>
> Says the closed source windows programmer who insists its ok to
> dereference a null pointer in C.
>
> You have zero credibility. Go away.
Bad rhetoric isn't a sufficient argument.
--
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
