🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4754@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I'm saying "RMS is leading a movement that is attempting to make people
>unwittingly lose their intellectual property rights, because he believes that
>restricting the use of software to people who have paid for it is evil."

The only right they loose is they cannot sell gnu code for their own
profit.

For anything other than the "GNU library" and "bison" issue:
    I fail to see how someone could unwittingly do this unless they
    havn't a clue.  Would you just snarf up code from ANY source with a
    copyright without at LEAST reading the copyright yourself.  You
    don't need a lawyer to figure it out.

If you ONLY mean "GNU library" and "bison" then:
    I agree that it is more possible that one could "unwittingly" use gnu code
    in this case although for me it still isn't an issue.  You would have to
    be pretty careless.

    Would you be happy if it were more obvious that you cannot use this
	code without falling under the GNU copyright?   Or does it really
	strike deeper than that?
    Would you be happy if these items were removed from the copyright realm?

-- sanders
Reply-To: cs.utexas.edu!ibmaus!auschs!sanders.austin.ibm.com!sanders
I love to hack, to hack, to hack . . .