| |||||||||||
We should emphasise the GNU GPL and discourage "copyleft"We should emphasise the GNU GPL and discourage "copyleft"Posted Jun 26, 2003 22:11 UTC (Thu) by StevenCole (guest, #3068)In reply to: We should emphasise the GNU GPL and discourage "copyleft" by allesfresser Parent article: Penguin on Thin Ice? (FindLaw) Yep, you're right. But take a look at what www.subvertise.org thinks "copyleft" means: CopyLeft means copyright except for non-profit making initiatives/organizations where the it is used to positively portray what it sat out to do. If you are not sure what it originally set out to do you must ask its creator. This means that you can use the (graphics, article etc.) If you are not making money out or it and do not have the intention...Sigh. The lesson learned from the above is not to try and write legalese when drunk or stoned. Here's an apropos passage from Lewis Carrol: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."My concern is that ambiguous usage and understanding of "copyleft" will serve to undermine the strength of the GNU GPL by proxy. Imagine if a majority of the Supreme Court justices confused the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. And used a copy of the Declaration from some random person's personal notes. The GNU GPL is our Constitution, and should be defended, even from the effects of sloppy and imprecise reporting as in the FindLaw article.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||