Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2009-01-30, ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> wrote:
> In article <857i4d20h7.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> 
> wrote:
>
>> ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> writes:
>> 
>> > I understand that the FSF is really, really hung up on every detail 
>> > of the GPL, but frankly, they're fanatics.
>> 
>> Fanatics have copyright like everybody else.
>
> Sure, I'm not saying they don't have a right to try to enforce the 
> requirement to make source available even in the case of unmodified 
> binary distribution. I'm just saying that there's no particular reason 
> why anyone who's more interested in the practical impact of the GPL 

     The practical impact of the GPL doesn't exist without there
being a certain amount of "Law & Order" to the whole thing. The
GPL thrives by exploiting relevant laws, so tolerating scofflaws is 
really not in ANYONES interest.

> rather than the ideology behind it should be particularly concerned 
> about entities failing to distribute source as required in instances 
> where that source is trivially available elsewhere.
>
> [snip]
>

     Nevermind silly things like rules, laws or contracts.

     The GPL wraps itself in "Law & Order" on purpose.

-- 
NO! There are no CODICILES of Fight Club!                           |||
                                                                   / | \
That way leads to lawyers and business megacorps and credit cards!