<div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Richard Fontana <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fontana@sharpeleven.org" target="_blank">fontana@sharpeleven.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:41:49PM -0500, Pamela Chestek wrote:<br></div><div class="im">
> I like the idea of explaining it in an FAQ. While FAQs wouldn't be binding in<br>
> an express contract way, but they would show what the practice in the industry<br>
> is, which is probably good enough.<br>
<br>
</div>With the GPL, for better or worse, the FSF's FAQ has been remarkably<br>
influential in affecting industry assumptions about GPL interpretation.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>When I was on the proprietary side of the house I just assumed (without agreeing) that the FAQs were the proper interpretation. It was like my neighbor who thought the property line was in a different place than what we thought; if I just observed his boundary line he wouldn't come out on his porch when he was drunk and yell at me for crossing it, and I would tolerate him coming around the fence and mowing the skinny little strip of grass between the fence and our driveway. And I suppose ultimately someday he would adversely possess that little plot of land, which is the point of the FAQs....</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Pam</div></div></div></div>