Re: DragonEgg has been revived

["Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>]

On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 4:59:43 PM UTC-5, Chris M Moore wrote:
> On 24/05/2018 20:26, Dan'l Miller wrote:
> > Specifically where in the set {GPLv3, RLEv3.1, copyright law's body of statutes in USCode, copyright treaties to which the USA is a signatory} does it overtly clearly say anything even remotely in the ballpark of that sentence above?  I want to read it with my own eyes.  I want reading comprehension.  (And hearsay commentary on some forum from 2009 where people speculate and parrot what other people say doesn't count; I want original sources and seminal references, such as quotations from members of that set above.)
> 
> I mean who uses "overtly clearly"?

Someone who wants to arrive directly rapidly at the •fully correct• answer within the root/seminal normative reference-documents—as opposed to the alternative:  ‘10 blind men in India feeling different parts of the elephant’, jawboning the same-old same-old parroted partially-correct/cherrypicked hearsay for yet another 10 years.

(Am I the very first person in all these 10 years who publicly posts—in any public forum on the planet—a walk-through step-by-step as I read the plain-language meanings of the license applied to juicy real-world use-cases, detailing precisely how each of the contractual-terms cause the viral license to spread versus to not spread in each of the different scenarios?  If not, post a URL to an analogous step-by-step walk-through of the back-&-forth interplay of Source Code, Object Code, Target Code, Compilation Process, Eligible Compilation Process, and so forth.  The walk-through is little different than a sportscaster calling the plays of a game, really—okay, its a whole lot more boring & esoteric, but still.)