From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265801AbTF3Jc2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2003 05:32:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265804AbTF3Jc2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2003 05:32:28 -0400 Received: from TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.214]:48812 "EHLO TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265801AbTF3Jc1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2003 05:32:27 -0400 To: Andre Hedrick Cc: Alan Cox , Svein Ove Aas , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Dell vs. GPL References: Reply-To: Miles Bader System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop From: Miles Bader Date: 30 Jun 2003 18:45:57 +0900 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andre Hedrick writes: > When they tell you they will not open a case on your behalf until a > registered copyright is in hand, that point real hard. Ok whatever, but what I don't understand is your comment that: > GPL loses, maybe better so it can be replaced with OSL and then it gets > serious because we will have teeth to defend the ideas of open source. The `copyright registration' requirements, whatever they are, would seem to apply equally to the GPL and whatever other `OSL' you have, so why on earth would some court loss related to copyright registration have any effect on what license people choose? -miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument!