4 ms·

> But the legal interpretation may diverge from the spirit and purpose of the license, so I would love to hear the opinions of a practicing lawyer... What are

> But the legal interpretation may diverge from the spirit and purpose of the license, so I would love to hear the opinions of a practicing lawyer... What are you talking about? You just heard an opinion from a practicing lawyer, and an IP lawyer at that. > I would say this is a popular opinion, especially given the upvotes I have received. There's no opinion here -- this is a matter of law, which you clearly have no expertise in.

mindslight 11y ago
> There's no opinion here -- this is a matter of law No, it is a matter of opinion on whether a certain behavior is in line with the spirit of the GPL2 or not. The purpose of GPL2 is to support the four essential freedoms. If it has bugs that fail to prevent certain freedom-destroying behavior, that does not preclude those behaviors from being considered anti-GPL2. I am not saying this as a legal opinion, which is why I go on to contrast. > You just heard an opinion from a practicing lawyer, and an IP lawyer at that. Yes, I have read many of DannyBee's other comments. This was meant as an invitation saying I really looked forward to him replying to my specific questions. If it came across wrong then I am sorry. (I edited it to say 'experienced' because I can't tell if he is still professionally practicing or has completely moved to the technical side.)