| That appears to be the main idea behind Pau's | comment. was that so difficult to understand?
Anyway, I don't give two faeces, my son and I have had fun all day dancing the "Home to Hypocrisy"! A nice mixture of Jason and the argonauts and that character, hypokrite5s 2008/4/12, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jacob Meuser wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 12:23:23PM +0300, Lars Nood?n wrote: > >> Pau wrote: > >>> ... I don't think it's a good idea to sow more discord > >>> ...than what there's already... > >> Most of what's there is probably not naturally occurring. > >> > >> Just to drive home that point, see p39, pp 45-55, and p 119 of > >> plaintiff exhibit 3096 from Comes v Microsoft (the "Iowa case") > >> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf > > > > huh? > > > Ok. For the intentionally or unintentionally obtuse: > > 1) Both variants (and representative individuals e.g. RMS and Theo) > encourage making useful software, using the software, and making money > from the software. > > 2) Copyright statements (aka licenses) are just another tool. Different > tools are needed to accomplish different tasks. Use the right tool for > the right job. Get over it. > > 3) There is one difference between the two in one aspect of how > 'freedom' is defined, especially in the context of software copyright > statements. They're not going to agree, they don't have to agree. > Get over it. > > 4) Other than that difference, there is great overlap between the chosen > copyright statements. That appears to be the main idea behind Pau's > comment. > > 5) Cultivating antagonism between allies *is* a key part of the strategy > used by the main opponent to OpenBSD. It wastes resources. In > contrast, constructive competition leads to improvement. > > Regards, > > -Lars
