Re: redistribution cygwin1.dll

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 01:07:45PM -0400, Jim Drash wrote:
>No I am not thinking trademark. Copyright law is based upon contract law.
>So there is legal "detriment" on both sides.  Failure to enforce
>provisions of a contact can make that contract voidible <sp?>.
>
>I am very tied of this debate.  The simple thing is to follow the details
>of the GPL (or whatever licenses applies) regardless of how "silly"
>anyone thinks it is.
>
>It is just so trivial for developers to comply and debates as to why one
>should not have to comply merely waste everyone's time and seem to make
>cgf more mean <rofl>

That's for sure.  And the obvious interpretation is that if I'm becoming
more mean, I must really be enjoying this, right?

Anyway, thank you for your interpretation.  Of course, you're not a
lawyer (I assume) so now we can play that game if we wanted to prolong
this.  I hope we can all avoid that.

If we can all move off this issue and stop responding to the trolls I
would really appreciate it.

cgf
--
Please use the resources at cygwin.com rather than sending personal email.
Special for spam email harvesters: send email to aaaspam@sourceware.org
and be permanently blocked from mailing lists at sources.redhat.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/