On 24/05/20 14:18, Valentin Villenave wrote: > On 5/24/20, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> You are working from the premise that everybody except you is an idiot. > > Guys, stop bickering and veering off-topic. The original purpose of > this thread was to help Francesco gain some insight into the copyright > modalities and possible publishing choices; arguing about whether one > particular license authorizes or not to sell software and/or CDs > and/or services may be interesting (though I believe this has already > been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere, and by more knowledgeable people > than *any* of us) but it remains absolutely orthogonal to the matter > at hand.
Sorry - I'm being the pedantic lawyerly type ... > > Granted, I was probably the one who opened that can of worms in the > first place; although I do have my own principles and beliefs, the > only point I’ve been trying to get across is that Francesco has > _several_ options (and not that many risks), rather than the Single > Mandatory Way that’s ordinarily offered to authors and artists. > > As far as I’m concerned, there is no invalid or morally corrupt choice > (even publishing under all-rights-reserved and subjugating oneself to > some private copyright organization), as long as it _is_ a choice, > made deliberately and not out of ignorance or fear. > AOL. As I said, I probably spent too much time on Groklaw. I've come across too many - REAL - examples where this nitpicking determined cases... often for the worse :-( (Admittedly, pretty much all in the US ...) Cheers, Wol
