Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim

[Alexander Terekhov]

Richard Tobin wrote:
[...]
> decline to accept the GPL, and start distributing [derivative work]

Without acceptance, an act of creating a derivative work (forget 
17 USC 117 adaptations for a moment) is a copyright violation, 
distribution or no distribution.

An author of a derivative work who accepts the GPL has copyright in a
derivative work but is required to surrender a right to charge more 
than zero for derivative work. "Copyright and patent laws give authors 
a right to charge more" (stipulated prolific and learned Chief Judge 
Frank Easterbrook), retard. You've been plonked until next week, 
GNUtian Tobin.

regards,
alexander.