Re: Switching to the OSL License, in a dual way.

["Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra" <lgcdutra@terra.com.br>]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:57:44 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:

> A clone is illegal because you'd have to reverse engineer to do the clone
> and reverse engineering is allowed for the purpose of interoperability,
> not for the purpose of making a clone.

	First, you are too US-centric.

	Second, if this is only what is allowed, then we are living in
a kind of a surreptitious world police state.  Not a free world by any
means.  In this circumstances, I will consider any clone attempt a
honourable act of civil disobedience necessary for the long-term
survival of humankind, barring the Second Coming.

	Now, your interpretations of others' words are certainly
self-serving.  If I define a clone as a workalike, one has to do no
reverse engineering.  It would suffice to do the same tasks, and use
your own interoperability stuff to get data back and forth.


> Given that, you can see why some people are disgusted that RMS would
> suggest it is OK to clone BK.  At that point, it becomes a statement of
> "it's OK to do illegal stuff if you are making GPLed software".  

	Not only self-serving, but libellous.  With each word you
expose even more the evil.


> Hardly the sort of thing you want on record in a public forum from a
> free software leader when people are starting to question whether or
> not the free software they have is actually legal.

	Even if I can't agree him on political or moral subjects, in
this instance RMS acted exactly as I expected, and I praise him for
it.  I hope he's proud for it, but not proud enough as to damage his
philosophy even more.


-- 
 _   Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra     +41 (21) 648 11 34
/ \  http://br.geocities.com./lgcdutra/         +41 (78) 778 11 34
\ /  Answer to the list, not to me directly!    +55 (11) 5686 2219
/ \  Rate this if helpful: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=leandro