|
From: | amicus_curious |
Subject: | Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar |
Date: | Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:35:04 -0500 |
"Thufir Hawat" <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> wrote in message news:9psol.15170$Si4.8455@newsfe22.iad...
Only if you don't know the meaning of the term.On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:55:44 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:The mere fact that you are distributing the software (usually the binaries, or as firmware) requires the distributor to make the source (and the very *same* source for the binaries) available. Failing to do so will put the distributor at odds with copyright lawNo shit, Dick Tracy. I simply say that is silly.And if the source isn't available then where's the attribution? At a minimum, sounds like plagiarism.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |