ESR response was shocking, blunt, and to the point:
ESR: "revokists" have it right. [Regarding GPL License]
Other urls found in this thread:
mikee was right all along
mikee was LARPing all along
Maybe if mikee was getting $200k like Eben we'd take his LARPing seriously eh. I mean it's only LARP if you aren't getting paid my fellow FOSS slave.
It's LARPing if you don't have a law license.
MikeeUSA has a law license, why do you think he makes it a point to say "I'm not looking for clients, just trying to inform lay people of their rights". If you had a license you would know.
Eben got over 200k a year from the FSF. What did he do all those years? The programmers got nothing.
He looks so smug in that last one, what is going through his head? Well fed too. It's like he's sitting like an eferti... and eats.
Mikee isn't a lawyer and neither is ESR. ESR is a hack who likes to stir shit.
would be more surprising if someone did something useful with the donation money they got. but no.. it always goes to some kike that does nothing useful
He's a lawyer who runs the SFLC that advised the FSF over GPLv3. There's a tax form around that shows him getting like $300k back in 2007. Gimme a few minutes and I'll see if I can find anything else.
I can only see ~150k for the past few years.
Mikee is a licensed attorney.
Sure you are. When are you going to sue Microsoft and me?
That's false. You can never provide evidence of any mikee being granted a license as it doesn't exist. Therefore LARP, case closed. I can find evidence of Eben Molgen holding a license.
Care to state your name and address, citizen. I would feel silly suing someone who turns out to be outside of US jurisdiction, and you have indicated multiple times that you reside in Germany. Secondly: if I sued a "John Doe" you would know my information, and your allies would attack me and try to get me disbarred for "being mean to womyn" while I would not have your information; this would not be to my advantage. I would be paying money for nothing. Third MicroSoft would try to get the case heard in the 9th circuit: who are not known for giving a damn about established legal precedent. If invalidating consideration as a requirement for a binding contract will help womyn and hurt men the 9th would be interested in this new found legal theory of the Women's Free Software Faction (who just rule over the mmmaallless and don't actually do any work).
Your logic does not follow. Informing you, user, of ones identity is not one of the requirements for acquiring a law license. Passing the bar, character and fitness, etc are the requirements. I am a licensed attorney. I have not given you my information as you would immediately attempt to have me disbarred for disagreeing with your novel legal theory that "opensource don' need no consideration fo it to be bindin' gainst the copyright owhna".
I'm not telling you my name. Get it from Microsoft :^). I am from Germany btw :^^)
I don't have allies. Also I agree with you in regards to wymyn.
Then why would I sue you?