Hi Folks, i would be very pleased if you dont spam me with sco brain fuck features. This is a technical samba users help list, why dont you flame this on a private list ? Regards ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Marcus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 7:50 PM Subject: Re: [Samba] [OT] Fyodor terminates SCO nmap rights -- how about Samba?
> >> Actually, didn't SCO make the arguement that any GPL'd software should > >> actually be declared "public domain"? If that's so, doesn't allowing them > >> to continue using the software under the GPL put the copyright at risk? > > > In their site they write (these are not THEIR words !): > > "Congress shall have Power [t]o promote the Progress of Science and > > useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the > > exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." > > Thi later cite a sentence that want to show they are right. The sentence > > is about extension of terms, that is how much "limited time" is excluseve > > right ! > > The only things that GPL license differ than a "normal" copyrighted work > > are: 1. the license does not "expire" 2. The license force you to license > > derived works with the same license. > > There are the points that SCO try use to show it is illegal. > > Observations: > > 1. : Yes, they are right on this point, but -apart that this would > > apply to any of the computer licenses- this would only have the effect to > > set a limit on the time it would apply, and since they see "right" to > > increase the spanm of tiome this would not be a problem now, and for may > > years to come [incidentally: each update of programs would shift further > > later expiring !]. The fact that whitin a certain time it would become PD, > > as many patents, should not worry much. > > Ahem... > > Many people have a hard time understanding American Constitutional issues... > > The delegation of authority to Congress: > > "...[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing > for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their > respective Writings and Discoveries." > > is NOT an exclusive one. In other words, it does NOT preclude any > PRIVATE association from creating their OWN system for protecting the > works of authors via contract, which is all the GPL is. It is valid, and > any judge with half a brain working at 50% efficiency can see this plain > as day - the problem will be finding a judge of this caliber who has > ever read the Constitution and studies it's application. > > Charles > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba > -- To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the instructions: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba
