🚀 go-pugleaf

nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes:
> In article <3029@tronsbox.xei.com> tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (Kenneth Jamieson) 
>    In article <NELSON.92Jan10174852@cheetah.clarkson.edu> nelson@sun.soe.clar
>    >The only people who don't benefit right now are the people who don't want
>    >their software to remain sharable.
> 
>    	Wrong. Some of the code I write is intended to be completely
>    sharable, to EVERYONE.
> 
> No, once your code has been incorporated into a commercial product,
> *that copy* becomes nonsharable.

Right, but *his software* remains sharable.  The derivative work doesn't,
but his software does.  So it's not the case that the only people who don't
benefit are those who don't want their software to remain sharable.

>                                    It doesn't matter that the public
> domain version is still sharable, someone has made a copy that cannot
> be shared.

No, someone has made a derivative work that can't be shared.  A copy is
not the same as a derivative work.


mathew

-- 
Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices / If
you know where I can buy the CD "In Mysterious Ways" by John Foxx, please send
me email / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! / My PGP RSA public key is
available on request / Desperately seeking CD of "U2" by Negativland / 4 lines