From: Twayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 7:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Re: Re: telephone #
> On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Twayne wrote: > >> IMO OOo is indeed akin to "public domain" in many aspects of the >> license and protection afforded to it. > > GNU LGPL has a clearly defined set of rights and obligations > associated with it. Violation of those rights is both a breach of > license and a breach of copyright law. > > Public Domain has no rights or obligations associated with it. As > such, there is no way to violate it. > > By conflating the two, you are impugning upon the moral rights of the > GNU LGPL creator, and as such violating copyright law. <snip> > jonathon >You do of course see the comedic quality of your response, don't you? I have no idea who >you are, who you think you are, or even who you really are, nor do I care, but come on, your >pompousity is only outdone by your attempts to redirect comments into areas that were and >are foreign to the post from the beginning. That's one of the oldest troller tricks in the >books. Your educational abilities leave a LOT to be desired and indicate a rather myopic >view of the world around you. > I don't mean to be as confrontational as you are likely taking it, but you can show off >your knowledge all you want and quote all the rules & regs you want, but a response such as >this one is not going to sway me in the least. I consider myself pretty open minded and >open to new information but all you've done is spout what you want to convey to others about >what you know, rather than any serious response to anything. I just can't give anything >like that any kind of credibility. > So if you're looking for me to "debate" you point by point, forget it. I only let >trollers suck me in just long enough to piss them off as a rule and then I forget about >them. I reiterate, I said what I mean, and I meant what I said. If that bugs you, then so >be it. > And that said, there is no further point to further communications with you. Your >comments are pointless and completely off the mark w/r to helping the OP and in fact >completely disregard the OP, the ONLY person you should be concerned with here, and then >only from a useful information standpoint. > >I've said all I have to say to you; from here on I'll not be bothering with your tripe. >Enjoy and flame at will. > >Love yourself lots, > >Twayne Twayne, Please do not be confrontational. Neither Jonathon nor I were trying to attack you or degrade you. While neither Sun Microsystem nor Open Office Org are responsible for what user post here, most people expect to receive accurate information from this forum---even if the information is not related to the question asked. I suspect that you have not had much contact with FLOSS programmers. For most FLOSS programmers the nature of the license is very significant. The Free Software Foundation has fought for more than two decades to get the world and especially the legal community to take FLOSS and FLOSS licenses seriously. The Debian organization's "Social Contract" is a very serious effort to further define what FLOSS is. Many developers have left projects because they were NOT happy with certain provision of the license that was being used. While you may consider it to be trivial or feel that a little miss-information is harmless, there are a whole lot of people that don't agree with you and even more important is that the group includes most of the developers that create software such as open office. There is no need for any "debate" here. You provided incorrect information in answer to question asked. At least two of us... Pretty much assuming that you knew FLOSS was not public domain, tried to correct the misrepresentation of FLOSS that you provided. While I can't speak for Jonathan, I suspect that he assumed no malice or intent to mislead on your part. I know that I certainly did not think that you were intending ignore or suggest to others that they ignore a FLOSS license. I am saddened by your tone with Jonathan particularly because Jonathan is a significant contributor to this forum and is NOT known to hostile to anyone. bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
