On 9/24/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Joe Fish</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:reverend.joe@gmail.com">reverend.joe@gmail.com</a>&gt; 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.&nbsp; As I said, the terms of GPLv3 have changed -- it is no longer based on &quot;distribution&quot;, it is based on &quot;conveyance&quot;.&nbsp; And, without GPLv3 enabling MS to &quot;assist in the conveyance of&quot; GPLv3 software, they have NO RIGHTS regarding that software at all, under US copyright laws, anyway.
</span></blockquote><div><br>The GPL&nbsp; grants permission to perform certain acts that would otherwise be against copyright law. If MS isn&#39;t doing any of those things, it doesn&#39;t need any license.&nbsp; The GPL can say that driving a Chevy is forbidden, which would deprive me of my rights to distribute GPLed software, but it wouldn&#39;t affect MS, who isn&#39;t distributing GPLed software, and will studiously avoid doing so.
<br>&nbsp;</div></div><br>