On 3/16/2010 10:05 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Read a bit more than a couple of introductory paragraphs
Nothing else you quote at all supports the notion that preemption has anything to do with the GPL. That's not surprising, since preemption has nothing to do with the GPL.
That is a dangerous position!
<http://www.technollama.co.uk/a-licence-or-a-contract> this argument would seem to suggest that any user of copyright works can be taken to court, and only then they can prove that they actually had a licence to use the work. Imagine the same paragraph above being said by Bill Gates and not by Eben Moglen, and you will get why this is such a dangerous position! This makes no sense. Assuming that "user of works" means someone who is copying and distributing them, then he is subject to infringement claims, to which he can use a license as a defense. This is equally true for rights held by Bill Gates or Eben Moglen and is entirely unsurprising. Why would this be considered dangerous? _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
