From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public From: Ronald Cole Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say? Date: 1997/08/20 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 268379713 References: <5ph4g5$sbs$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5pim4l$5m3$1@news.nyu.edu> <5ptv7r$4e2$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5pu5va$64o$1@news.nyu.edu> <5qdof6$iav$1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <33D6FA2B.9B7@ix.netcom.com> <33E00855.2BA7@ix.netcom.com> Organization: RidgeNet - SLIP/PPP Internet, Ridgecrest, CA. (760) 371-3501 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss Date: 1997-08-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > < "current product release" of GNAT) for less money from someone else, > because of policies like Cygnus' or ACT's whereby they'll threaten to > quit doing business with you if you exercise your "right". > >> > > This is pure fantasy, ACT has at no time threatened to quit doing > business with anyone for any reason. If "doing business" includes getting "wavefront releases", then you openly admit that this isn't a "pure fantasy"? dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > < I proceeded to make them available for anonymous ftp, you wouldn't > retaliate?>> > > If people started distributing wavefront versions freely, then w would > probably reluctantly decide to stop making them available, since it would > be clear that their distribution was harmful. That would be too bad for > the cases where they really solve a problem. It would appear that the answer is a resounding "yes"! Oh, and I openly challenge your fictitious notion that free distribution of your "wavefronts" would be harmful. If the very existance of freely available GPL'd (unwarrantied) software were harmful in some way, I'm quite sure that Stallman would have written the GPL in such a way as to allow for its nullification in those circumstances. But, since it's so clear to you, perhaps you'd care to elucidate? And please, feel free to compare/contrast with the "harmful" Linux kernel development releases... -- Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412 Ronald Cole Phone: (760) 499-9142 President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152 My PGP fingerprint: E9 A8 E3 68 61 88 EF 43 56 2B CE 3E E9 8F 3F 2B