These last two postings must have slipped in before the moderation took
effect on the mail server.

Greg


On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Maxthon Chan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Forgot to mention, OS X 10.9 is based on iOS 6.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2013年6月19日, at 22:33, Gregory Casamento <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Maxthon,
>
> Please do not post information that is either under NDA or which has been
> obtained via reverse engineering methods.   While reverse engineering might
> be legal in some countries it is not legal in all countries.
>
> Graham is correct in what he said.  The FSF acknowledges and respects
> intellectual property rights.  By ignoring these rules you are jeopardizing
> the project.  Please respect the rules we have laid down for you here
> regarding the posting of such information to this list.
>
> I am the list moderator, I have flagged your subscription for moderation.
>   This doesn't mean you've been removed from the list, it simply means that
> your posts will be forwarded to the list after review by me at my
> discretion.
>
> Thanks,
> Gregory
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Graham Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Those who do not learn from history are doomed to reinvent it. From
>> "Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealism" (
>> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html):
>>
>> > Consider GNU Objective C. NeXT initially wanted to make this front end
>> proprietary; they proposed to release it as .o files, and let users link
>> them with the rest of GCC, thinking this might be a way around the GPL's
>> requirements. But our lawyer said that this would not evade the
>> requirements, that it was not allowed. And so they made the Objective C
>> front end free software.
>>
>> The Free Software community has got where it is today by acknowledging
>> the complex system of intellectual property protection as it exists, and
>> using it in novel ways in order to extend freedoms to the users of its
>> software. This has been done, as we see in the example above, by respecting
>> and working with the legal systems in place, not by ignoring them or
>> proclaiming that they do not apply. Sometimes it means that things we might
>> want to do such as reverse engineering proprietary software should not be
>> done. Other times it means that things other people might want to do such
>> as incorporating free software into proprietary products should not be
>> done. So there are sometimes downsides, and sometimes benefits: either way
>> there is a clear set of values in play that lead to this game having
>> certain rules.
>>
>> You are, in ignoring these rules, ignoring the values that many of the
>> people on this list share with the organisation that "owns", in its way,
>> the GNUstep project. It is not a surprise that these people are, as a
>> result, asking you to avoid repeating your mistakes or even calling for you
>> to be removed from the mailing list. Please consider this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Graham.
>>
>> On 19 Jun 2013, at 14:18, Maxthon Chan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Given that:
>> >
>> > 1) Apple did not patent Cocoa and/or their implementation of
>> CoreFoundation, and
>> > 2) GNUstep contains no Apple code
>> >
>> > We will be good, as Apple have no reason to drag us into trouble. We
>> are not infringing any IP at all if that two conditions is met.
>> >
>> > Just look at Mono which is a binary-compatible reimplementation of
>> Microsoft .net and they did not complain (and even eventually advertising
>> it to some extent).
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> >> On 2013年6月19日, at 21:05, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Why do you want to transform GNUstep into something else ?
>> >> Why do you want to implement exactly the same way it's done by Apple ?
>> >> Maybe you are excited to discover technical details and I completely
>> understand that but
>> >> your discoveries won't be implemented.
>> >> What you are trying to do I have already followed that path by trying
>> to implement CoreGraphics
>> >> using reverse engineering and CFLite and it was fun to do but at the
>> end it was useless for
>> >> legal reasons among other things.
>> >> I should have participated to GNUstep instead of loosing too much time
>> on this project.
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Gnustep-dev mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gnustep-dev mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnustep-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory Casamento
> Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant
> yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
> (240)274-9630 (Cell)
> http://www.gnustep.org
> http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
>
>


-- 
Gregory Casamento
Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant
yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
(240)274-9630 (Cell)
http://www.gnustep.org
http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev

Reply via email to