Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:49:46 -0700 From: don morrison <dmorrisn@u.washington.edu> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Draft of Nader letter Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980614214946.00822820@dmorrisn.deskmail.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806150417.WAA07271@lariat.lariat.org> References: <3.0.5.32.19980614203656.00814950@dmorrisn.deskmail.washing ton.edu> <199806150248.UAA06154@lariat.lariat.org> <3.0.5.32.19980614182616.0080c6c0@dmorrisn.deskmail.washing ton.edu> <199806150000.SAA04235@lariat.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Not so at all. You're forgetting that the addressee is a lawyer. He'll know >far more about "public domain" and its implications than about many other >things in the letter. Look, you're still nit-picking. The specific license terms of FreeBSD were not the topic of discussion. All in all, I think FreeBSD was fairly well represented, positively even, and _in general_, in a correct manner. Do you think that lawyers are incapable of understanding the pretense of when a message is written in basic generality? A better way to engage Mr. Nader and Mr. Love than screaming at them for not being perfect would be to write them a letter telling about the Berkeley License and what good it has done for the world. Undoubtably, that is why they bothered to mention the GNU License--I'm sure many GNU supporters have written them saying, "Have you heard about GNU? It's great! It's done......" Get what I'm saying? I can understand why it irked you, but it's really a moot point. Don't waste your time. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.19980614214946.00822820>