5 ms·

This is an unproductive discussion, you're telling me that "you're wrong, but I don't know why". In any case, "trivial" has a meaning under copyright law and t

• dragonwriter 12y ago
  > This is an unproductive discussion, Yes. Largely because you keep inventing things I'm not saying to respond to. Such as: > you're telling me that "you're wrong, but I don't know why". No, I never said anything like that, and I stated quite directly how you were wrong. > In any case, "trivial" has a meaning under copyright law I don't think that's accurate, and the article you offered upthread to support that position does not -- in fact, the only uses of trivial in that article are to make the point that the legal concerns it discusses (idea vs. expression, and functional vs. creative works) are relevant in the same way to trivial (which it doesn't discuss as a term with legal significance) and non-trivial programs. And, in any case, the use of "trivial" in Stallman's post isn't connected to anything related to copyright law -- even if "trivial" was a term that had legal significance, that wouldn't make every use of "trivial" in regard to the GPL automatically related to that significance, especially when the sense of "trivial" being used is explicitly defined in the work in which it is used and isn't tied to the definition of any legally-significant distinction.