On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Joseph Carter wrote: >On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 05:20:09AM -0600, John Galt wrote: >> >> 2) the group/readme >> > >> >If there is no legal problem with this, it's better (because it's less of >> >a hassle!) >> >> I'm thinking it could be construed as a DBA. > >?
The group name would be as if a partnership filed a Does Business As. > >> >Don't you still have to notify everyone? What if some people cannot be >> >contacted? Must notice be served in any particular manner or does an >> >email count? (This is what worries me in the first place..) >> >> Written notice (basically court service). As far as "cannot be >> contacted", if publishing in the paper's enough for service on the >> Defendant, I'm sure it should be good enough for a potential Plaintiff. > >I don't have access to newspapers in foriegn continents. ;) But I get >the idea. > > >> >Anyway, I'm not sure everyone is going to be interested in taking that >> >risk, and I'm not sure I blame them. >> >> No, I can't either. But I'd be remiss if I didn't at least tell you about >> it. > >Well supposedly SPI already exists for this purpose, however SPI and >Debian both cower in fear from the mere potential of a cease-and-desist >letter because someone got the bright idea that one might be possible >under a silly US currently law being actively challenged which most legal >scholars have already condemned as unconstitutional. Given that, Ask Dmitriy Sklyarov how ineffectual it is.... >At this point, I don't have any dillusions that SPI has the desire nor the >ability to defend itself from a $5 small claims suit, let alone initiate >legal proceedings on behalf of someone else in defense of the GPL. > >> >> 5) assign rights to a trusted third party or a third party that all agree >> >> should recieve them. >> > >> >And this is even riskier. >> >> True enough. The risk is usually outweighed by the intangibles associated >> with the third party. If they aren't free software zealots, perhaps some >> other charity like the local church or something. > >I can just envision being able to declare it sinful to violate the GPL. >It would throw a few BSD guys I know into fits. ;) Definite potential >there just for the sake of watching them sputter about the evils of GNU >for an hour or so. =D Most of the BSD types that care about the BSD/GPL thing already think that the GPL advocates have a holier than thou attitude anyways... -- The Internet must be a medium for it is neither Rare nor Well done! <a href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">John Galt </a>
