On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 17:46 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> [...]
> > The thing is that the copyright licenses of software like Microsoft
> > explicitly say you have to have one license per computer. Now... if they
> > were only stating copyright law, would they
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 14:35 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Keep in mind that copyright law doesn't concern itself with
> distribution of AUTHORIZED copies and that the act of distribution
> doesn't turn AUTHORIZED copies into unauthorized copies.
Here you go again, confusing _your_copy_ with
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[...]
> The thing is that the copyright licenses of software like Microsoft
> explicitly say you have to have one license per computer. Now... if they
> were only stating copyright law, would they have to do that?
What they are stating is this: (MS EULA)
*
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 11:50 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> >
> > [... legal scheme to escape copyleft ...]
>
> I resent the innuendo implicated by this cut, which could lead someone
> to think I wrote a legal scheme to esc
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 11:50 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>
> [... legal scheme to escape copyleft ...]
I resent the innuendo implicated by this cut, which could lead someone
to think I wrote a legal scheme to escape copyleft.
Another of your nice works of fra
Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
[...]
> Of course they can. The copyright holder most definitely cannot control
> how the software is used (unless there is a contract stipulating
> such), because copyright law doesn't give such rights - it's the right
> to make and distribute copies that is granted to th
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
[... legal scheme to escape copyleft ...]
> You realize all this emails could probably be proof of your scheme to
> break copyright law? A never ending search for ways to break it in your
> profit?
>
> What you just said could be quickly read as accessory to crime
Uber GNUtian "Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote: (to GNUtian dak)
[...]
> No wonder why Alexander likes you enough to `unplonk' you.
Erm. I've unplonked you both sometime around last Silvester. Then I've
replonked you, ams. GNUtian dak didn't take my offer of free replonk,
go ask mini-RMS (he volunteered t
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The thing is that the copyright licenses of software like Microsoft
> explicitly say you have to have one license per computer. Now... if they
> were only stating copyright law, would they have to do that?
No. Because copyright law would not a
