Raul Miller wrote: > First, you really ought to learn to think clearly. > > You've assigned the wrong purpose to the GPL.
We have different views on this. I don't think this necessarily makes me wrong. It all depends on how the future plays out. Frankly, I hope you're right; I hope I am wrong. I hope the GPL proves to be just another boring legal document with a scope limited to the mundane affairs of controlling the distribution of software. I encourage people to decide this for themselves though. > Earlier, you asked why Debian didn't issue a statement of protest > against RMS. For breaking the law. > > If you still hold that point of view, I don't see you presenting the > relevant information, to back it up. If you don't hold that point of > view, I don't see you apologizing. You are correct. I own RMS a big apology. Your argument that if he doesn't buy commercial software, why would he buy commercial music seems the most reasonable. I wish I had considered it earlier. So, my humblest apologies to RMS. I don't regret the thread though. It has largely cleared up my misconceptions by giving me an understanding of the GPL that goes beyond its four corners. Paul Serice
