MESSAGE
| DATE | 2015-03-17 |
| FROM | Rick Moen
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Apple crimes
|
Quoting Ruben Safir (mrbrklyn-at-panix.com):
> Yes, I do get it,
Ah, so the extreme rhetorical overkill and grossly misleading wording
was _deliberate_. OK.
> it means that Apple is fucking around with objective C++ and should
> just assign it to the FSF so that they can put the entire object C++
> branch under the GPL3 so that they have primary legal standing in the
> case of lawsuites.
Oh, so FSF is entitled to own what Apple creates using its own efforts?
Am I entitled to own everything you create using your own efforts? If
so, please send signed, dated copyright assignment via first class mail.
Thank you.
Is Linus Torvalds entitled to gain copyright ownership over everyone
else's code contributions to the Linux kernel? Are you intending to
call everyone who fails to do so a criminal?
Methinks you have a truly bizarre notion of what is a 'crime' and should
consider setting up your own country somewhere else before you get in
trouble with this one's legal system.
> Copyleft protections are worth shit if your not willing to sue over
> them which CLEARLY what Apple wants, not just over this, but
> historically for a long time on multiple fronts.
So, by that same logic, that is also what every Linux kernel code
contributor other than Linus Torvalds wants? And all of the many
copyright enforcement lawsuits that have succeeded in numerous
jurisdictions filed by a variety of Linux kernel stakeholders are in
fact impossible and must not have existed? Did I get that right?
Logic, Rubin. Learn it before you die.
|
|
