RE: Rsync over ssh (pulling from Cygwin to Linux) stalls..

["Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>]

On 14 August 2006 20:48, mwoehlke wrote:

> Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 14 August 2006 18:41, mwoehlke wrote:
>> 
>>> Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> On 14 August 2006 17:04, mwoehlke wrote:
>> 
>>>>> My understanding is that if you place it in Public Domain, then anyone
>>>>> can do anything with it and no one can stop this. IOW RedHat would be
>>>>> safe because no one can prevent them from using Public Domain material
>>>>> in any manner or fashion.
>>>>   That's not what "safe" means.  If the program is in the public domain,
>>>> rather than RH having the copyright assigned to them, then anyone could
>>>> take it, make a proprietary version and distribute it without the
>>>> sources, and RH would not be in a legal position to enforce the GPL on
>>>> it because they would not be the copyright holder.
>>> And the problem with this would be what, exactly? "Safe" in that no one
>>> can take legal action against RH because of their use of it.
>> 
>>   No, redhat is "safe" in /that/ sense automatically, because the code is
>> GPLd and so they and everyone else in the world can do what they like with
>> it, and nobody can stop them.  The meaning of "safe" for redhat would be
>> "safe from anyone stealing it for proprietary use", because the code would
>> not be safe against that unless someone who can afford lawyers - such as
>> RH - holds the copyright.
> 
> ...I think this is what Daryl is taking issue with: you are essentially
> *forcing* GPL onto someone. Not everyone agrees with that philosophy (in
> my case, it depends on my mood :-)).


  It's not forced onto anyone.

  There is a fair exchange offered, and it is up to every individual whether
or not to take advantage of it.

  The fair exchange is that, in order to become the beneficiary of millions of
person-hours worth of work for the total fiscal cost of precisely $0.00, you
are in exchange required to relinquish any rights you may have otherwise
reserved to take courses of action that would allow you to attempt to - sorry,
but I can't find a better way to express it than a metaphor - enclose the
common land, seize a part of the commons for your own personal benefit, take
something which is joint property of others and annex it to your own private
property.

  This is an entirely /voluntary/ relinquishment of your rights.  It is not
*forced* on anyone.  If you do not want it, you are free to not make use of
the GPL'd software.  It's your choice.  It is, however, entirely *concordant*
with notions of property rights and contract law.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....