🚀 go-pugleaf

Your tolerance for this wacko is in some ways admirable, but I'm inclined to
suggest that its only effect seems to be to encourage him.

Aside from the curiosity of observing the workings of an incompetent
intellect, his posts don't seem to have anything to offer either this
discussion or, more generally, the newsgroups in which it is taking place.
Without wishing to try to stifle your participation in the wider discussion,
I'd prefer not to see interaction with Richard continue to clutter up
comp.arch (gnu.misc.discuss is not a group I care about) - and one
reasonable way to achieve that end is simply to ignore him (since he seems
to have nothing relevant to say anyway, I don't believe there'd be any
down-side to this).

Apologies for butting in,

- bill

Stefaan A Eeckels <Stefaan.Eeckels@ecc.lu> wrote in message
news:86shaf$kqk$1@justus.ecc.lu...
> In article <38915E40.2DC1DF32@home.com>,
> Richard <2prometheus@home.com> writes:
> > Isaac wrote:
> >
> >> If there is no distribution to whom do I owe source code or an offer?
> >
> > If I break into your computer and copy your GPLed software, then you
> > still owe me source code for any of that software to which you are the
> > author. By placing your software under the GPL, you have automatically
> > pre-licensed me (I get the license the moment I touch the software).
> > How I came by the software is utterly irrelevant for GPL license issues.
> This is utter nonsense. If the software has been published, you
> don't need to break into the author's computer. If it's only
> available on the author's computer, it isn't published, hence
> you don't have a license, hence you're a common thief.
>
> > The people who gave you the GPLed software you didn't write also owe
> > me source code for that software, unless you got it from them the same
> > way I got it from you in which case it reverts back to whoever gave the
> > GPLed software to /them/ all the way back until we hit the original
> > authors.
> The author owes you diddly squat. If the code is released under
> the GPL, it can be obtained from an archive. Nothing in the GPL
> gives *you* any right WRT the author. It grants you the right to
> redistribute and make derivatives, two rights you don't have unless
> they're specifically granted to you. It imposes a duty on *you*,
> if you wish to redistribute or make derivatives. It does not impose
> a duty on the original author to provide you with anything.
>
> > The GPL allows all this because it grants automatic licenses to
> > every person who wishes it and complies with its clauses /regardless
> > of whether they paid anything to anyone/.
> If I publish/release my code under the GPL, I grant those
> who obtain my code the right to redistribute, to derive
> works from my code, and to distribute these derived works
> provided they distribute the source under the same, or a
> less restrictive license. I am under no obligation to send
> source code to anyone who asks me for it. That obligation
> rests with those who accept my license by redistributing
> my work.
>
> You confuse a right granted to you with a duty imposed on
> the person who granted you the right.
>
> <OT>
> A society can grant its members rights, and at the same time
> decide that it has contracted an obligation to provide these
> members with the benefits of this "right". This, however, does
> not allow an individual to appropriate these benefits from
> another individual. It allows said individual to demand these
> benefits from society, represented by those who granted
> the rights and contracted the obligation (in this case, the
> governments you despise, and that signed the UDOHR).
>
> Advocating that you've the right to steal food when you're
> hungry, the right to break into a house when you're cold, or
> kill people who "refuse" you your rights, inexorably leads to
> the rule of the strongest, without any of the current checks and
> balances, how imperfect these might seem to you now. Believe
> you me, you (nor I) would last very long in such a society.
> </OT>
>
> --
> Stefaan
> --
> --PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)--
> Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
>         The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
> the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.