What promise did you rely upon?
It is the right of the property owner to revoke.
You payed the property owner (Linux Programmer 721) nothing for his
code.
He never promised you that he would forgo his right to revoke
(Read the GPLv2, there is no mention of not revoking the license.
Something
I was addressing OpenBSD as-well, I chose the lists to CC to: linux
lists and BSD, since the underlying concerns are the same.
It took slightly longer to find the appropriate openbsd list, infact, so
you definitely weren't CC'd by accident.
On 2018-12-27 22:54, leo_...@volny.cz wrote:
zeur h
Your initial argument, as I imagine you ment to communicate (a single
negation, rather than the double negation you proffered) hits a snag:
I am a licensed attorney.
"You ain't no lawyer, buddy"
Your double negatives speak the truth: I am a licensed attorney.
"you're a clueless halfwit"
I'm
Real name pls, if want to be taken somewhat serious? Thank you.
So where my logic cannot be attacked, my person may be instead?
Do you think me a fool, simply because you do not know what you do not
know (the law), yet think you do (an attribute of many programmers: know
one field, know them al
Why is no one discussing this anymore.
It's like you just accepted the "NU UH U WRONG" proclamation from
programmers.
Are you idiots aware that programmers DO NOT KNOW THE LAW simply by
virtue of being "smarts"?
Are you idiots aware that I am a lawyer, I have studied the law, and I
do know
(2) ... (I am not going to go over the legal mistakes you've made,
because of (1))...
I have not made legal mistakes, pompous programmer asshole*.
A gratuitous license, absent an attached interest, is revocable at will.
This goes for GPLv2 as used by linux, just as it goes for the BSD
license
Bradley M. Kuhn: The SFConservancy's new explanation was refuted 5 hours
after it was published:
Yes they can, greg.
The GPL v2, is a bare license. It is not a contract. It lacks
consideration between the licensee and the grantor.
(IE: They didn't pay you, Greg, a thing. YOU, Greg, simply
It has been 2 months. Eben Moglen has published no research.
Because there is nothing more to say: The GPLv2, as used by linux, is a
bare license. It can be rescinded at the will of the grantor.
The regime that the FSF used, vis-a-vis the GPLv2, is essential:
copyright transfers to a central
Debian is not ruled by the men who actually write the software, but
instead women.
Just like in all the anglo-american conquered world.
We, the men who actually do work, are treated as the same worker-slaves
everywhere.
Opensource was a refuge from the worthless cunts (who ban us from having
9 matches
Mail list logo
