[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SFLC chooses wrong court

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: SFLC chooses wrong court
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 21:12:14 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <> writes:

> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 01:38:58PM +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> > were widely touted as proof of its efficacy.  One of these days
>> > someone who is anti-GPL will find it advantageous enough to finally
>> > swat that annoyance. "
>> You mean, like Daniel "anti-GPL lunatic" Wallace?
> No. I actually meant a defendant not willing to settle, not a plaintiff 
> like Danial Wallace.
> But thanks to Danial Wallace, the 7th Circuit of the United States now 
> operates under the following law:
> 1.) [FOSS contributors can't charge] "Thus the GPL propagates from 
> user to user and revision to revision: neither the original author, 
> nor any creator of a revised or improved version, may charge for the 
> software or allow any successor to charge. ... Linux and other 
> open-source projects have been able to cover their fixed costs 
> through donations of time"

(and 2 and 3)

Uh, you are confusing the _circumstances_ for a ruling with its
consequence.  The circumstances certainly do not become prescribed as
law.  For example, in the following ruling
<URL:> there is a lot of
circumstances, but most of them don't become subject of a law or legal

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]