On 9/24/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Joe Fish</b> <<a href="mailto:reverend.joe@gmail.com">reverend.joe@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<span class="q"></span><span>Hey, its not ME that started the food analolgy. As I said, the terms of GPLv3 have changed -- it is no longer based on "distribution", it is based on "conveyance". And, without GPLv3 enabling MS to "assist in the conveyance of" GPLv3 software, they have NO RIGHTS regarding that software at all, under US copyright laws, anyway.
</span></blockquote><div><br>The GPL grants permission to perform certain acts that would otherwise be against copyright law. If MS isn't doing any of those things, it doesn't need any license. The GPL can say that driving a Chevy is forbidden, which would deprive me of my rights to distribute GPLed software, but it wouldn't affect MS, who isn't distributing GPLed software, and will studiously avoid doing so.
<br> </div></div><br>