Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!ucbvax!agate!eris.berkeley.edu!mwm
From: mwm@eris.berkeley.edu (Mike (I'll think of something yet) Meyer)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: BISON, GCC, and the GNU public license. (Re: increasing yacc states)
Message-ID: <26994@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 5 Aug 89 03:45:30 GMT
References:  <26@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> <26947@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <5524@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mwm@eris.berkeley.edu (Mike (I'll think of something yet) Meyer)
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 89

In article <5524@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
, mwm@eris.berkeley.edu (Mike (I'll think of something yet) Meyer) writes:
<> I didn't
<> mean that you had to be rich to distribute things built with
<> commercial tools, but that you had to be rich to buy them.
<
 In which case, they obviously have no problems whatsoever with the GNU
<> copyleft. RMS doesn't choose to produce tools for these machines. That
<> means they lose an option available to others. You think RMS should be
<> forced to write for those people also?
<
 We keep going away from the central point,
<> which is that there are _lots_ of ways to make money off of copylefted
<> works. Unless you choose to talk about that point, I'm going to drop
<> the thread too.
<
 Final comment: you seem to care an awful lot about the licensing
<> restrictions on software you don't use.
<