Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Reply-To:	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Message-Id:	<6.1.0.6.0.20040508120847.03272770@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender:
Date:	Sat, 08 May 2004 12:33:22 -0400
To:	"Patrick J. LoPresti" <patl AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>,
	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
From:	Larry Hall <cygwin-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: GPL violation ?
In-Reply-To:	<s5gd65fp2ua.fsf@patl=users.sf.net>
References:	<20040505182418 DOT R31761 AT unsane DOT co DOT uk> <c7b9d5$f64$1 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <20040505185724 DOT C31875 AT unsane DOT co DOT uk> <20040506155542 DOT GC27589 AT coe DOT bosbc DOT com> <s5g8yg4asor DOT fsf AT patl=users.sf.net> <6 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 6 DOT 0 DOT 20040507223728 DOT 032780e8 AT 127 DOT 0 DOT 0 DOT 1> <s5gd65fp2ua DOT fsf AT patl=users.sf.net>
Mime-Version:	1.0

At 07:54 AM 5/8/2004, you wrote:
>"Do not feed the trolls."  


Which troll is that?


>I honestly did not expect any replies; I
>hate these discussions as much as anybody.  I will keep this brief.


While I respect your right to voice your opinions here, the reason I 
responded was that I didn't want anyone to misconstrue your opinion as
some policy of this list.  Although I expect there wouldn't be too much 
confusion about your response, I thought it better to be clear than to 
leave something like this to question.


>Larry Hall <cygwin-lh AT cygwin DOT com> writes:
>
>> Then your gripe is with the GPL.  The point is, whether you agree
>> with all the tenants of the license or not, you cannot selectively
>> apply it based on your own interpretation or preferences. Doing so
>> renders the license unenforceable for every situation, because the
>> license doesn't discriminate.
>
>Where did you get this idea?
>
>I am not a lawyer.  But according to my friend who specializes in
>intellectual property, selective enforcement does NOT weaken your
>license.  As copyright holder, you may grant different licenses to
>different people or enforce a single license as whimsically as you
>like.  These are copyrights, not trademarks.
>
>Of course, if your own lawyer says differently, you should follow his
>advice.


And so that's what the folks on this list do.


>P.S.  Yes, yes, everybody should respect the license without
>exception.  But that is irrelevant to the point.  Everybody should do
>lots of things.  You cannot fix them all; you have to prioritize...


And if that's what works for you, that's what you should do.  However, 
the previously stated stance for this list is to enforce the license 
without exception. 



--
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street                   (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746                     


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -