BitKeeper licence critic

MJ Ray markj at
Sun Mar 10 23:21:41 UTC 2002

Joerg Schilling <schilling at> wrote:
> It oboiusly a miss interpretation!

They are obviously badly worded terms.

> You are not allowed to save a copy of the HTML version.
> So you cannot "have" the standard at home.

Where does it say about continued possession being required?  Also, I have a
local cache, so it would be saved here, in effect.

> I believe it would be illegal in any country to charge for a publication
> that you only have been able to view.

I am not a lawyer.  Are you?

> It is obvious that Mark simply does not like to view the standard :-(

I'm indifferent, actually.  It was a mere curiousity to justify a point you
made and, as such, while I would go to a library to look something up, I
would not buy the book, especially not one without a marked price.

> .. If you participated the standard creation

== If I paid money to join, etc?

Anyway, what is the point of this paragraph?


More information about the Discussion mailing list