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
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030325094609.02bc18a0@pop3.cris.com>
X-Sender: rrschulz AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:02:50 -0800
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com>
Subject: Re: Another GPL violation: Re: Minimalistic  
  Build-Environmentforwin32 (~7.5MB)
In-Reply-To: <s5gfzpbcprk.fsf@egghead.curl.com>
References: <mit.lcs.mail.cygwin/3E7FE4EB DOT 1040603 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
 <055001c2f197$65eb9990$2000000a AT schlepptopp>
 <1048506223 DOT 912 DOT 118 DOT camel AT localhost>
 <014801c2f261$f0b553c0$2000000a AT schlepptopp>
 <1048566137 DOT 914 DOT 209 DOT camel AT localhost>
 <3E7FE2EF DOT 8000900 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
 <3E7FE4EB DOT 1040603 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Pat,

At 09:36 2003-03-25, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
>Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> writes:
>
> > FWIW: I am not a lawyer.
>
>And therefore, everything you have said may be safely ignored.

Et tu?


>Until this alleged GPL violator receives a "cease and desist" order 
>from an attorney, he has no reason to even consider modifying his 
>behavior.  (Except to be polite, of course.  But at this point, he has 
>little reason to want to be polite.  And providing a simple link to 
>the Cygwin sources is nice enough to begin with.)
>
>I really love it when non-lawyers talk about law, because it's 
>hilarious.  Engineers are the best.  They have this fascinating notion 
>that laws mean what their written text says.  Actually, laws mean 
>whatever the courts decide they mean.  The apparent written text is 
>not terribly important.  Want evidence?  Consider what happens when 
>the text of a law, in your opinion, conflicts with a court's 
>interpretation.  Guess to whom the people with badges and guns are 
>going to listen?

That's not quite correct. It's certainly true that lawyers and the law 
use an argot that readily confuses lay people and perhaps confuses 
engineers more than most. However, you characterize the semantics of a 
contract or license agreement as completely unrelated to the words used 
to express that meaning. I don't accept that. Civil courts resolve 
issues of intent and meaning of an agreement when the parties to it 
find themselves at odds over its interpretation.


>Your notions about what constitutes a "GPL violation" are nothing more 
>than your opinion.  And you are not even qualified to have one, much 
>less to express it.  Much like the guy on the street corner expressing 
>his opinion about the end of the world, it is kind of boring.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Even you. Few people are entitled 
to have their opinion accepted as correct or most relevant or as the 
prevailing one. Judges, as you point out, are a notable exception.


>I hope everyone cheerfully ignores all these accusations of "GPL 
>violations" and proceeds exactly as they have been.  I also hope the 
>people making these accusations find better things to do with their 
>time, but I admit to being pessimistic.

Do you also wish upon them that cease-and-desist order?


>Cheers!
>
>  - Pat


Are you a libertarian? Do what thou wilst? Greed is good? Amoralism and 
anarchy for all?

Randall Schulz 


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/