Re: Significance of the GP licence.

[RJack]

David Kastrup wrote:
> RJack <user@example.net> writes:
>
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> > > RJack <user@example.net> writes:
> > >
> > > > VICTOR TARABOLA CORTIANO wrote:
> > > > > OK I'm so fucking tired of this.
> > > > >
> > > > > I use OpenBSD. I use GCC. Use GNU/Linux.
> > > > >
> > > > > BSD is free. GPL is free.
> > > > Don't worry. The GPL license and the "Free Software" religion 
> > > > will soon reside in history's trashbin that contains Urban 
> > > > Legends.
> > > A few people told RMS when he started.  Now it is a whole hissing
> > >  and yelling bunch.  That they bother is the best proof that they
> > >  are wrong. And they know it.
> > There are still a few nut-jobs out there in Cyberspace who believe 
> > the GPL is enforceable, even though the license requires that 
> > copyright permissions be licensed at "no charge to all third 
> > parties".
>
> More relevantly, there are no judges out there in court rooms who 
> believe the terms of the GPL can be ignored while making use of its 
> permissions.

Please provide links to those US federal judges who *do not* "believe
the terms of the GPL can be ignored." I await with 'bated breath for
your documentation.
> And that's what counts, regardless of where you think your nut-jobs 
> may be hanging out.

Sincerely,
RJack :)