Re: hello

[graham@belegost.mit.edu]

Hi again
> use the HTML power, for example, to make hyperlinks with
> the mailing list from the main text ;-)
good idea, I'll do that
> 
> > The rest of this reply is broken into sections to make it
> > easier for me. :-)
> are you that tired ? ;-P
no, a very slow connection that sometimes breaks half-way through
a long reply.. yes, I know I should download then upload, but
I prefer to reply from a mail reader..
> 
> > > but when it comes to the denominations, i'm forced to use the "usual" vocabulary.
> > OK, how about just using the word 'design'? Given the same definition
> > as in para 2 of 'What is in common with the gpl', you could use the
> > word design instead of IP almost everywhere in the text without
> > changing the end result.
> 
> heh, maybe you weren't that tired after all.
> this sounds cool. lawyers will hate.
>
I don't think lawyers would be any happier with 'ip'. I've done it,
its version 0.012. What do you think?

<snipped long section about why stronger version of gpl needed>
OK, I understand what you're saying and don't have anything
to add... 
> 
> > There's no such organization
> > for hardware designs. Maybe there will be one day.
> are you volunteering ? ;-P
Needs someone with a strong personality, and a lifetime to
dedicate - and I'm no rms... maybe a certain M.Guidon? ;-)
> 
> one reason to going away from the classical GPL is because it can't be applied
> verbatim to certain countries (ie France where the author's rights are
> another legal tool that sometimes replaces the copyright stuffs).
I've seen arguments that the gpl is invalid in most of central/eastern
europe too, because of authors rights - that the attempt by the law
to stop authors being exploited by unscrupulous publishers means that
authors simply aren't allowed to give their work away without compensation.
Is that the problem in France? Is your stronger gpl a solution to that?

> It is also because
> we can't have a monolithic house (aka FSF) in a country (aka USA) and send
> the lawyers in a plane to another country to protect the licence and its users
> on a case per case basis. there might be a silly way to solve the lawyer problem
> (through reversed auctions ;-D) but that's REALLY not a good idea...
One thing you see in many commercial licenses is something like 'acceptance
of this license includes acceptance that any court cases arising from
or related to the licence will be heard in a court in the Paris region
of France' (well usually it says 'California', but the ideas the same)
> 
> and finally :
> 
> but i don't miss such a lesson. for me a SGPL is a good solution. ask RMS if it is
> possible.
Maybe you can ask him? After last time, I felt I was beating my head against
a brick wall. But if you are seriously going to ask him I would wait till
you have something more filled in and concrete to discuss (ie. some of
the rest of the license, and maybe also at least an informal lawyers
opinion).
> 
> > > maybe we can ask the FSF to issue a SGPL (like the LGPL, but with "stronger"
> > > instead of "light"). 
The impression I had from before is that anything related to hardware
design is a low priority to the FSF - they may back you if you have
something already created, but are unlikely to put any work into creating
something FOR you.

> 
> anyway, what do you think about the labels : "this product contains genetically modified
> soja" or "this beef has got five seringues of growth hormones" etc...
> when there's something important that the user should be aware of, it is written on the
> package.
At the moment the US government is taking the European Union to court
to force them to change the law to ban these labels. The point being
that such things are not imposed by something as feeble as copyright,
but by explicit laws. Of course I want these labels on my food. I also
want labels on chips pointing to documentation. I want documentation
that tells me about the internal structure, about how to repair it
(well, for PCBs if not CPUs!), about how to interface to it - like there
used to be not so long ago. For me, this is one of the main points
of the license and its finding a way to enforce it that really makes
manufacturers do this that is important. Without this I would just
say 'use the gpl' and not bother about the rest...

> there's something to dig here.
? =shovel? ='dig it, man!'?
> 
> > > and these are my first words, so this is not a definitive point of view.
> > Makes a lot of sense to me, though :-)
> wow :-)
je suis tellement combatif, alors? :-)

Graham