--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Alexander Chamandy <bsdfreak@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Your argument that because -- supposedly -- The NetBSD Foundation
> > ``cannot litigate'' their trademarks and copyrights, it's acceptable to
> > violate them does not seem very convincing.  By this arguing, The NetBSD
> > Foundation should not insist on other software companies abiding by the
> > BSD license, since they (TNF) -- supposedly -- can not litigate any
> > violations.
>=20
> Correct me if I'm wrong here, but how can TNF, when they are having
> problems maintaining a single (and primary) cvs server, hope to
> litigate IP?

While that is entirely irrelevant to the discussion, in this
particularly instance I would think it to be quite simple.[1]

You seem to argue that b/c a rule can -- supposedly -- not be enforced
means it doesn't apply.  I won't be dragged into ridicolous
dramatizations, but suffice it to say that this is not how society, law
or ethics work.

-Jan

[1] http://www.cafepress.com/cp/info/help/iprights.aspx

--=20
Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so.

--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCD9eRfFtkr68iakwRAm4qAJ9GQHbrcSWNkl2PA9eqsZ2IqYdMPQCfUJCb
qpPgkii4RU5f1t/mn2cRyTg=
=OQKF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH--