Linux going to be big in China 3750
How about addressing the examples I gave, which you did not dispute in the slightest, which show it's *you* who does not understand how the term is used in a *legal* context?
To refresh your memory (since I'm not sure if Outlook can back up a few posts in a thread):
"This is why, if you modify GPL code but don't distribute your modified copies, no one has any copyright claim against you and the GPL doesn't apply. Google has stated that they use some modified Linux code, but they don't distribute those copies outside their organization so they don't have to share those changes.
Even though they are direct examples of copying not forbidden by copyright? Terms used in legal senses very frequently don't correspond with common usage. For example, you can easily claim your...
Most commercial software has a EULA that prevents you from making more than backup copies (if that) but that's a license term, not a copyright provision."
...for distribution. Go talk to your IP lawyer golf buddy again; he has some weird ideas, but even he should be able to straighten you out on this one.
-- Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
Reporters were kept out to make sure there would be no dangerous question-and-answer period that might show Bush gloating. "If I had my way, the president wouldn't answer any questions between now and the election," said one Republican political operative.