conducting a sane and efficient GPLv3, LGPLv3 Review
zak at greant.com
Thu Aug 2 16:25:00 UTC 2007
Hey Larry, Greetings All,
On Aug 1, 2007, at 15:25PDT (CA), Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>> Please cite relevant published opinions and cases, not "conversations
>> with many other attorneys."
> Quite frankly, I'd rather hear directly from other attorneys on
> this list
> rather than quote private conversations with LOTS of attorneys
> going back
> many years. ***Please don't be afraid to speak up.*** The worst
> that will
> happen is that you'll start another flame war with GPL zealots
> about how
> important it is for the FSF to protect GPL software and the "copyleft
> philosophy" from other software regardless of what the copyright law
> actually says. :-)
I didn't ask for you to quote private conversations. That would have
been irresponsible on my part.
> If you believe that my reading of GPLv3 or copyright law is wrong,
> why don't
> YOU cite published opinion or case to that effect?
I am not making any assertions about your correctness or
incorrectness or my ability to competently make a determination
Asking people to validate claims, such as claims that there is a "...
disagreement between Larry and most other people" or claims that
"most other people think FSF and
SFLC are wrong" is perfectly reasonable.
I wasn't attempting to address the issue of correctness or
incorrectness. Instead, I was struck by how you countered hogwash
with, well, hogwash.
> You know as well as I do,
> Zak, that the courts have not spoken out about these topics in the
> source context with any clarity. Asking me for case citations at
> this stage
> is a way to shut off discussion.
I may at times give the appearance of competence, it is - sadly -
mostly only appearance. Case law moves forward and I am often
unaware. Perhaps I should correct this.
In the meantime, asking you (and others) to provide the rationale
behind their beliefs isn't wrong or stifling.
More information about the License-discuss