Re: US court says software is owned, not licensed

[David Kastrup]

"amicus_curious" <acdc@sti.net> writes:

> "Alan Mackenzie" <acm@muc.de> wrote in message
> news:hat7ab$2oop$1@colin2.muc.de...
>> In gnu.misc.discuss amicus_curious <acdc@sti.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "David Kastrup" <dak@gnu.org> wrote in message
>>> 87ws326l79.fsf@lola.goethe.zz">news:87ws326l79.fsf@lola.goethe.zz...
>>>> "amicus_curious" <acdc@sti.net> writes:
>>
>>>>> "David Kastrup" <dak@gnu.org> wrote in message
>>>>> 87skdr9gsd.fsf@lola.goethe.zz">news:87skdr9gsd.fsf@lola.goethe.zz...
>>
>>
>>>>>> Now I would not put it past you to try to set up a business centered
>>>>>> around this purportive loophole.  But nobody in his right mind would
>>>>>> care to do important business with you anyway.  You come across as
>>>>>> far too willing to take unnecessary risks.  Your compulsive desire to
>>>>>> prove yourself clever and the rest of the world stupid is simply too
>>>>>> dangerous in a business partner.
>>
>>>>> Very few have ever succeeded in any business centered around open
>>>>> source software.
>>
>>>> More than those in any business centered against open source software.
>>>> Most of the openings against open source software appear to be in Usenet
>>>> trolling.  The former is a billion dollar market.  The latter does not
>>>> appear to feed more than a handful of people.  And they occupy
>>>> identities like busy Potemkin villagers.
>>
>>> What use do you anticipate for pulling something that stupid out of thin
>>> air?  You folk seem to think that a mere sneer is an adequate response to
>>> anything that you cannot answer otherwise.  That is why you are still in
>>> last place.
>>
>> Well, what a comparison!  I wonder who would come top in a "get a life"
>> poll - There're people like David, who write and maintain useful free
>> software.
>
> Is that so?  What software and why do you think it useful?

I am participating with Emacs, TeX, AUCTeX.  It appears useful because,
uh, people use it.

> I would rather that he was able to make intelligent comments in regard
> to the topic thread, of course,

Sorry if they are over your head...

> but I am always curious.
>
> He made the rather audacious and totally unsupported statement that
> the "GPL software market is worth billions by now" and he ducks and
> runs from the challenge that his notion is simply false.

Huh?  There was no challenge.  If there had been, it would have been
easy to counter.  RedHat's market capitalization is 5.29billion at the
moment, their main product is RedHat Linux and an estimated 80%
(including the kernel) of any Linux distribution is under the GPL.

So "billions" is a rather conservative statement, as it suffices to
throw a single company into the ring for supporting that number.

> When challenged he reverts to calling me a troll and asserts that is
> answer enough.  Perhaps the facts of the matter would devastate his
> ego and he hides because of that, but regardless of the reason, the
> response is worthless.

Better one response than the whole existence, I'd say.

-- 
David Kastrup