Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 11:04 AM, RJack wrote: The GPL is preempted by 17 USC sec. 301 The GPL is a copyright license which authorizes certain actions based on the exclusive rights given to copyright holders by federal copyright law. The federal preemption of state copyright equivalence provisions is comp

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective > > works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified > > program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL > > and/or

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law? T

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/29/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Stop moving the goalposts Hyman. You've been talking about collective works aka compilations. How come that now it's called "a unified program"? Don't you know that such a term is not defined in the GPL and/or copyright law? The "unified program"

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Forgot one bit. Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Hyman Rosen wrote: > > > > On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > > http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html > > > The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " > > > > > > http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula

Re: [Eben's Bullshiting Stunt March 18, 2010] "GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process"

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/26/2010 1:29 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://weblog.ipcentral.info/archives/2007/03/delusions_of_gr.html Wow. A website dedicated to glorifying the denial of freedom to software users is whining about GPLv3. Shocking, just shocking. Oh woe is me! Harken! Dragons

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html "The Software is a collective work of Novell" Note that Red Hat's

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html > > The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " > > > > http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html > > "The Software is a collective work of Novell" >

Re: [Eben's Bullshiting Stunt March 18, 2010] "GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process"

On 3/26/2010 1:29 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > http://weblog.ipcentral.info/archives/2007/03/delusions_of_gr.html Wow. A website dedicated to glorifying the denial of freedom to software users is whining about GPLv3. Shocking, just shocking. ___ gnu-

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/26/2010 5:23 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhel_us_3.html The Software is a collective work under U.S. Copyright Law. " http://www.novell.com/products/opensuse/eula.html "The Software is a collective work of Novell" Note that Red Hat's and Novell's collective

Re: [Eben's Bullshiting Stunt March 18, 2010] "GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process"

http://weblog.ipcentral.info/archives/2007/03/delusions_of_gr.html "Delusions of Grandeur: GPLv3 Is A License That Thinks It‘s a Regulation Having examined the latest draft of the Free Software Foundation’s General Public License version 3 (GPLv3) several times, and having looked over the Rati

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > But until such a reasoning appears in the _ruling_ but just in one of a > count of charges . . . Uh silly dak. http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf "Nature of Suit: 190" http://directory.westlaw.com/scope/default.asp?db=DO

[Eben's Bullshiting Stunt March 18, 2010] "GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process"

Hey GNUtians, any chance of a link to audio or video of that recent Eben's bullshiting stunt? TIA! http://www.osadl.org/Single-View.111+M55857da67f4.0.html - 09.20-09.40 GNU GPL Version 3: The Law Making Process Prof Eben Moglen, Columbia University, New York City 09.40-10.10 D

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> You did not understand a word of what you were replying to, again. The >> whole point was that in the case of a _license_, as opposed to a >> contract, any such stipulation of a _penalty_ is _invalid_, and _only_ >> sustained damages c

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > You did not understand a word of what you were replying to, again. The > whole point was that in the case of a _license_, as opposed to a > contract, any such stipulation of a _penalty_ is _invalid_, and _only_ > sustained damages can actually be claimed. Uh silly da

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> > [...] >> >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is >> >> > >> >> > Da

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> Alexander Terekhov writes: > >> > >> > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > [...] > >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > >> > > >> > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > >> >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Alexander Terekhov writes: >> >> > David Kastrup wrote: >> > [...] >> >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is >> > >> > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: >> > >> > It's established by several courts in Germ

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > > [...] > >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > > > > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > > > > It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB > > contract.

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is > > Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: > > It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB > contract. > > http://www.jbb.de/fileadmin/download/jud

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: Hyman Rosen writes: On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: Hyman Rosen writes: On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate work after the original wor

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is Dak, please stop ignoring the facts: It's established by several courts in Germany that the GPL is an AGB contract. http://www.jbb.de/fileadmin/download/judgment_dc_frankfurt_gpl.pdf "The GPL grants

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 5:15 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > It also means that as far as copyright law is concerned, > > compilation copyright can be licensed as its owner sees fit. > > Got it now? > > There is nothing to "get". The creator of the compilation owns > the copyright

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Pascal Bourguignon writes: > And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? Explain. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.

Re: SFLC is SOL

On 3/19/2010 2:38 PM, RJack wrote: This is the same pattern as Verizon (who also told them to kiss their ass) After the case against Verizon ended, Verizon made the GPL-ed sources properly available. Thus, a successful outcome for the SFLC. The SFLC will *never* voluntarily allow a federal ju

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Hyman Rosen writes: >> >>> On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate work after the original work h

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 5:15 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: It also means that as far as copyright law is concerned, compilation copyright can be licensed as its owner sees fit. Got it now? There is nothing to "get". The creator of the compilation owns the copyright to the arrangement of the works, but can

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > You're a bit confused as usual, Hyman. http://www.ivanhoffman.com/tasini.html "The United States Supreme Court ruled that print publishers such as newspapers and magazines may not use material in online databases to wh

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > Certainly the owner of a collective or derivative work gets > “to exercise the right to control” those works, and the owner > of each contribution gets “to exercise the right to control” > his or her contribution. (17 U.S.C. § 103[b].) > > so he's ce

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-21 22:14:30 -0400, Pascal J. Bourguignon said: > >> Sure. >> >> And the question remains why you should imposes your choices on me? > > My principal objection to the GPL is that its license requirements > regarding opening source code make it very unpopular

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 4:22 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] There is no difficulty within copyright law for a rightshttp://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/00-201P.ZS holder to say that "you may make and distribute standalone copies provided you meet condition one, and you may make a

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 3:47 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Let the author http://www.rosenlaw.com/rosen.htm know about his "error piles upon error". I'm insufficiently motivated to bug someone about some mistake he made years ago. If he shows up here, I'll change my mind. By the way,

Re: CSRG archives

Alan Mackenzie wrote: > > In gnu.misc.discuss RJack wrote: > > > If creators can prove they have authored some original code and > > properly register their that original code with the Copyright Office > > > > This is the bit I don't get yet. What's the purpose of having to > register co

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 3:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf > > The author of this seems not to realize that there is no > right to copy and distribute works as part of a collective > work without the authorization of the rights holders of >

Re: SFLC is SOL

On 3/22/2010 11:30 AM, RJack wrote: It is easily verified that neither link leads to the alleged infringed program source code. Of what use is a transparent lie? The source code for BusyBox is included in . _

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > There is no difficulty within copyright law for a rights > holder to say that "you may make and distribute standalone > copies provided you meet condition one, and you may make > and distribute copies of a collective work incorporating > the covered work provided you mee

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 3:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf > > The author of this seems not to realize that there is no > right to copy and distribute works as part of a collective > work without the authorization of the rights holders of >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 3:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf The author of this seems not to realize that there is no right to copy and distribute works as part of a collective work without the authorization of the rights holders of the components. Given that incorrect

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Nicolas Neuss writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> It does not get you "anything additional", but it gets you something >> _less_: a proprietary product that uses your own code to draw your >> user base away from you. > > This is quite understandable - I would not really like seeing Microsoft >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 2:36 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > derivative work != collective work (aka compilation aka "mere > > aggregation" in GNU-speak) > > > > Got it now? > > No, of course not. Daniel Wallace and you are both people who > deliberately choose to misinterpret the

Re: GPL misappropriation

RJack writes: > I have been poking around in the source code for BusyBox, > v.0.60.3. and unsurprisingly most every thing in the those command > line utilities are substantially similar to the old BSD4.4-lite > tree. Not only are the defendants Best But et. al. not guilty of > infringing Erik And

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 2:36 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: derivative work != collective work (aka compilation aka "mere aggregation" in GNU-speak) Got it now? No, of course not. Daniel Wallace and you are both people who deliberately choose to misinterpret the GPL for your own purposes. Naturally, court

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: Hyman Rosen writes: On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate work after the original work has been created! Well, actually, let me ta

NYC LOCAL: Wednesday 31 March 2010 NJLUG: Revolution OS Movie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_OS [page was last modified on 17 March 2010 at 23:54]" also="http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=7707585592627775409#"; edits=""> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:54:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Revolution OS screening. The New Jersey Linux User's gro

Re: GPL misappropriation

David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov writes: > > > Hey stupid dak, here's a nice post on sublicensing. Hth. > > > > http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=296845&cid=20592673 > > (IANAL, but I actually agree with Theo) > > > > "... Here are specific points I would make: > > > > 1) While

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 2:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Clear to whom? > > Clear to those who are not eager to deliberately misinterpret > the GPL for their own purposes. Hyman, the FSF is on record: http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf "In fact, the GPL itself rejec

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: >> it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the >> rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate >> work after the original work has been created! > > Well, actually, let me take this part back. What changes i

Re: SFLC is SOL

On 3/19/2010 4:15 PM, RJack wrote: The plaintiffs can verify absolutely *nothing* about their vacuous propaganda claims of "compliance". Of course they can. Verification is as simple as going to the web page of the defendants and seeing that the GPLed sources are now being properly distributed

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 2:18 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Clear to whom? Clear to those who are not eager to deliberately misinterpret the GPL for their own purposes. ___ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listin

Re: GPL misappropriation

Hey stupid dak, here's a nice post on sublicensing. Hth. http://bsd.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=296845&cid=20592673 (IANAL, but I actually agree with Theo) "... Here are specific points I would make: 1) While the BSDL and related licenses clearly do not have the intent to force sharing of code,

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > Possibly counterintuitively, the goal of maximizing open source is > actually better accomplished by *not* choosing the GPL. I guess this is why Linux has been totally eclipsed by BSD. > Instead, these potential users will become users of some other library > which is

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 12:59 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Hyman, please stop ignoring the facts. > > And in fact, "mere aggregation" means exactly what the FSF wants > it to mean, not more and not less, because "mere aggregation" is > not a term defined by copyright law but a t

Re: SFLC is SOL

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/16/2010 2:43 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > The "unadorned" copyright doesn't not put restrictions on terms and > > conditions of licensing of the new copyright in a derivative work (which > > is exclusive rights and which belongs to the author of derivative work) >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the > rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate > work after the original work has been created! Well, actually, let me take this part back.

Re: GPL misappropriation

David Kastrup wrote: [...] > > (Intellectual Property Licensing: Forms and Analysis) > > > > "Absent an explicit grant of sublicensing rights, no right to sublicense > > is generally presumed.5 ... 5 Raufast SA v. Kniers Pizzazz, Ltd., 208 > > USPQ (BNA) 699 (EDNY 1980). " > > What about "Absent

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Ralph writes: > I think people should avoid GPL licensing their work as a pragmatic > means of ensuring maximal adoption. You assume that everyone has maximum adoption as their primary goal. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:59 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman, please stop ignoring the facts. And in fact, "mere aggregation" means exactly what the FSF wants it to mean, not more and not less, because "mere aggregation" is not a term defined by copyright law but a term defined by a license, and as s

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote: If the program can't be compiled (and successfully prelinked) without inclusion of the corresponding library headers, it is somewhat strange to argue that the creation of the binaries is an act independent from the library, just because the _binaries_ o

NYC LOCAL: Wednesday 17 March 2010 NYLUG: Forest Mars and Jingsheng Wang on Drupal

From: NYLUG Announcements To: NYLUG Announcements Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 09:30:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nylug-announce] TOMORROW! NYLUG Presents: 3/17 @ 6:30PM Forest Mars and Jingsheng Wang on Drupal makes me hAPI: Open source social publishing architecture Reply-To: Announcements from

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 12:51 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Sez who? > > 17 USC 101 > > A “collective work” is a work, such as a periodical issue, > anthology, or encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, >

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > Using them would place their employer or the commercial organization > to which they belong under the obligation of publishing all of the > source code for any released product that included your library. They are not required to publish it. They are merely required to

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:51 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Sez who? 17 USC 101 A “collective work” is a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology, or encyclopedia, in which a number of contributions, constituting separate and independent w

Re: GPL misappropriation

Alexander Terekhov writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> > (Intellectual Property Licensing: Forms and Analysis) >> > >> > "Absent an explicit grant of sublicensing rights, no right to sublicense >> > is generally presumed.5 ... 5 Raufast SA v. Kniers Pizzazz, Ltd., 208 >> > USPQ (BNA) 699 (E

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 11:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> It would appear that you are not familiar with the realities of dynamic >> linking on UNIX-like operating systems. Dynamically linked libraries >> (we are not talking about Windows DLLs here) are carefully versioned and >> tend

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:50 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Why do you think that "assembled" doesn't fall under "mere aggregation"? Why do you think that "collection and assembling" doesn't fall under "mere aggregation"? Do you think that leaving out the portion of the law which shows you are wrong is co

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 12:33 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Wow. Hyman, I agree with you 100% with the caveat that static > > linking doesn't change anything. It's mere aggregation > > Your agreement or disagreement is irrelevant, since even when > your conclusions are correct y

Re: SFLC is SOL

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/19/2010 4:15 PM, RJack wrote: The plaintiffs can verify absolutely *nothing* about their vacuous propaganda claims of "compliance". Of course they can. Verification is as simple as going to the web page of the defendants and seeing that the GPLed sources are now being p

Re: GPL misappropriation

RJack writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> RJack writes: >> >>> I have been poking around in the source code for BusyBox, v.0.60.3. >>> and unsurprisingly most every thing in the those command line >>> utilities are substantially similar to the old BSD4.4-lite tree. >>> Not only are the defendants

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 12:00 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > An anthology is "mere aggregation" of literary works. > > ... > > Think of shipping a pile of e-books in own file. That's what static > > linking is as far as copyright is concerned because relocation and > > symbol res

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:33 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Wow. Hyman, I agree with you 100% with the caveat that static > linking doesn't change anything. It's mere aggregation Your agreement or disagreement is irrelevant, since even when your conclusions are correct you seldom arrive at them through co

Re: Mining the Blogosphere

On 3/18/2010 4:26 PM, RJack wrote: The goals of the FSF are suspect because they are perpetrating a fraud by illegally attempting to steal other people's exclusive rights. The goals of anti-GPL cranks are suspect since they espouse copying and distributing the work of others against their wishe

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 12:00 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > An anthology is "mere aggregation" of literary works. > ... Think of shipping a pile of e-books in own file. That's what static linking is as far as copyright is concerned because relocation and symbol resolution are irrelevant details regarding

Re: GPL misappropriation

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > The creator of a derivative work may license his work in any way > he chooses, and the BSD license does not forbid that. Meaning that material originally licensed under the BSDL must remain licensed under the BSDL (with just a few restrictions imposed on binary-only for

Re: Mining the Blogosphere

RJack writes: > It is amazing to watch the communication strategy that Free Software > advocates utilize in promoting their socialist goals. The FSF and SFLC > have created an efficient network of Astroturf sites that is dedicated > to promoting their goals. Moglen, Perens, Khun, Lessig and a gro

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 11:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > > It would appear that you are not familiar with the realities of dynamic > > linking on UNIX-like operating systems. Dynamically linked libraries > > (we are not talking about Windows DLLs here) are carefully versioned and > >

NYC LOCAL: Thursday 18 March 2010 UNIGROUP: Steven M. Crimando on Behavior-Based Emergency Preparedness and Response

http://www.unigroup.org/unigroup-fees.html"; location="The Cooper Union School of Engineering, see below" info="http://www.unigroup.org"; edits="some paragraphs removed so notice fits in mailboxen"> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:16:15 -0500 (EST) From: Unigroup_of_NY Subject: UNIGROUP Meetin

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 11:50 AM, Peter Keller wrote: It is that "permit linking proprietary applications" phrase which is the rub. It doesn't mention static or dynamic, so one must assume both. No. It does not matter what the GPL or the LGPL says unless there is a reason that the license should apply. Wh

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Ralph writes: > Mac OS X is BSD Unix. No it isn't. It's a heavily modified Mach single-server kernel with a partial BSD userland. And Apple contributes little or nothing back. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA ___

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 11:30 AM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: The release of the Library GPL is an implicit recognition of the fact that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. No. The LGPL is an attempt to get people to use free libraries when they might easily use non-free ones instead. It trades away some of

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 11:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote: It would appear that you are not familiar with the realities of dynamic linking on UNIX-like operating systems. Dynamically linked libraries (we are not talking about Windows DLLs here) are carefully versioned and tend to become incompatible with their

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Peter Keller wrote: [...] > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html "What constitutes combining two parts into one program? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide." To wit: http://www.law.washington.edu/LCT/Events/FOSS/MootFacts.pdf (Moot Court Statemen

Re: GPL misappropriation

Peter Köhlmann wrote: >Hadron quacked: > >> David Kastrup writes: >> >>> Alexander Terekhov writes: Meaning that material originally licensed under the BSDL must remain licensed under the BSDL (with just a few restrictions imposed on binary-only form) and not hijacked by the

Re: GPL misappropriation

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:22:52 -0500, RJack wrote: > Peter Köhlmann wrote: >> Hadron wrote: >> >>> David Kastrup writes: >>> Alexander Terekhov writes: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> On 3/22/2010 3:41 PM, RJack wrote: >>> That will never happen. Copyrights are exclusive rights an

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 3/25/2010 11:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Static linking is "mere aggregation" of (sub)programs with relocation > > and symbol resolution done earlier than in the case of dynamic linking. > > No, static linking results in a combined work since the > elements are

Re: SFLC is SOL

On 3/19/2010 2:14 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Wow, you already have compliance one of the defendants? Sez who? The web page of the defendants, here: HDC-3000 Open Source Release Note: This is not a required download.

Re: Mining the Blogosphere

RJack writes: > Hyman Rosen wrote: >> It's also no surprise that an anti-GPL crank faced with the >> contradiction of opposing FSF "socialism" but favoring copying and >> distribution against the wishes and rights of copyright holders has >> no response other than profanity. > > One man's profani

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Raffael Cavallaro writes: > On 2010-03-25 09:51:04 -0400, Hyman Rosen said: > >> The FSF does not believe that the GPL is a poor fit for >> libraries. > > The release of the Library GPL is an implicit recognition of the fact > that the GPL is a poor fit for libraries. Correction: for equivalents

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 11:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> Static linking is "mere aggregation" of (sub)programs with relocation >> and symbol resolution done earlier than in the case of dynamic linking. > > No, static linking results in a combined work since the > elements are cho

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 11:18 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: Static linking is "mere aggregation" of (sub)programs with relocation and symbol resolution done earlier than in the case of dynamic linking. No, static linking results in a combined work since the elements are chosen with intention and by design

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > Similarly, mere aggregation is irrelevant to libraries which > are statically linked into programs. Such a combined work is > not a mere aggregation of the library and the other components. Static linking is "mere aggregation" of (sub)programs with relocation and symbol

Mining the Blogosphere

It is amazing to watch the communication strategy that Free Software advocates utilize in promoting their socialist goals. The FSF and SFLC have created an efficient network of Astroturf sites that is dedicated to promoting their goals. Moglen, Perens, Khun, Lessig and a growing list of "advocates

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 10:05 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Licenses covering a work "as a whole" are hard to press >> when the material they cover is functionally a drop-in >> replacement of existing non-free libraries. That makes >> "mere aggregation" a really good defense. > > This is

Re: GPL misappropriation

David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Terekhov writes: Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/22/2010 3:41 PM, RJack wrote: That will never happen. Copyrights are exclusive rights and cannot be licensed by anyone except the *owner* of a copyright. Releasing BSD licensed code under the GPL is simply attempting to

Re: SFLC is SOL

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/22/2010 3:56 PM, RJack wrote: Just for once Hyman, try to read the Complaint. Andersen claims (falsely) that he owns BusyBox, v.0.60.3 -- that's exactly what he re4gistered with the Copyright Office. His claim to ownership of BusyBox, v.0.60.3 is the *only* thing that g

Re: SFLC is SOL

RJack writes: > Just for once Hyman, try to read the Complaint. Andersen claims > (falsely) that he owns BusyBox, v.0.60.3 -- that's exactly what he > re4gistered with the Copyright Office. His claim to ownership of > BusyBox, v.0.60.3 is the *only* thing that gives the court > jurisdiction to he

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

On 3/25/2010 10:05 AM, David Kastrup wrote: Licenses covering a work "as a whole" are hard to press > when the material they cover is functionally a drop-in > replacement of existing non-free libraries. That makes > "mere aggregation" a really good defense. This is completely wrong. The GPL app

Re: GPL misappropriation

Peter Köhlmann wrote: Hadron wrote: David Kastrup writes: Alexander Terekhov writes: Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/22/2010 3:41 PM, RJack wrote: That will never happen. Copyrights are exclusive rights and cannot be licensed by anyone except the *owner* of a copyright. Releasing BSD licensed c

Re: SFLC is SOL

Alexander Terekhov wrote: Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] to continue, and we indeed already have compliance from one of the defendants in the recent filings. Wow, you already have compliance one of the defendants? Sez who? LMAO, silly Hyman! The SFLC retreat into total defeat is easily verified

Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

Hyman Rosen writes: > On 3/25/2010 9:44 AM, Raffael Cavallaro wrote: >> It's ironic because the FSF is the creator of the GPL, >> and even they recognized that the GPL was a poor fit >> for libraries which is why they created the Library >> (now Lesser) GPL. > > The FSF does not believe that the

Re: SFLC is SOL

Hyman Rosen wrote: On 3/22/2010 11:30 AM, RJack wrote: It is easily verified that neither link leads to the alleged infringed program source code. Of what use is a transparent lie? "Transparent lie"? "TRANSPARENT LIE"??? Show me a link to the source code for BusyBox, v

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >