[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak |
Date: |
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 11:59:06 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 2/8/2010 11:49 AM, RJack wrote:
Sigh... I guess I'll just leave that argument to you
> and your agents to try on a federal judge in a copyright
> infringement case Hyman.
Yes, exactly. Even if you were correct about downstream
distributors not having authorization to distribute, which
you are not, before this could be a court issue the rights
holders would have to sue the downstream distributors for
copyright infringement. Since the rights holders want this
distribution to occur, as evidenced by using the GPL as the
license, this will never happen.
- The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/02/06
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, David Kastrup, 2010/02/07
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/07
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, David Kastrup, 2010/02/07
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/07
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, David Kastrup, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, RJack, 2010/02/08
- Re: The GFDL is _not_ a public license, says dak, David Kastrup, 2010/02/08