rms at 1407.org claiming "licenses aren't contracts" and that... [was: Re: Microsoft claiming...]

[Alexander Terekhov]

(Subject changed: back on "license-discuss" topicality :-) )

http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Licen%C3%A7a_de_software_livre&diff=cur&oldid=7241703

"Em outras palavras, uma licença de software livre é um contrato que
garante aos usuários de um software livre a permissão para remover
qualquer aspecto de propriedade intelectual do software que, caso
contrário, descaracterizaria sua condição de software livre."

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/tr

"In other words, a license of free software is a contract that
guarantees to the users of a free software the permission to remove
any aspect of copyright of the software that, in case that contrary,
would deprive of characteristics its condition of free software."

is (well, now actually was) <quote> actually so factually wrong that
it can only have been written by people who are agains Free Software,
and want to spread disinformation. </quote>

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-misc-discuss/2007-10/msg00100.html

And so he quickly patched it. :-)

While refusing to give any comments when confronted with

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Horn/99/RTCOMP.htm

may I note.

regards,
alexander.

--
"To show the falsity of 'PJ''s claims, in most cases I need look no further
than Groklaw itself. 'PJ' wants more journalists to use the site as a
resource, so I'll do just that. Below are excerpts from my story that 'PJ'
says are incorrect, followed by 'PJ''s characterization of them, and my
response -- at times taken directly from Groklaw."