To: John Tserkezis,

 BL> Yes... that's what I'll do eventually. I'm just surprised that
 BL> the Internet is 13 years old and no one has done it already.

 JT> I think they used the "don't fix it if it 'aint broke"
 JT> philosophy. I believe if it aint broke, it aint working well
 JT> enough.

  You can't change it, if it needs new software to run it. Standards
are software-driven: you write a standard, you write software to run
it, everyone uses it... then you can't change it!

   I think Paul's system is the forerunner of a new way to use the
Internet. In using UUCP technology, we can expand his net
internationally at no cost... because the technology exists. The next
step is to write software that makes it easy, and the step after that
is to improve the UUCP system... software driven.

 JT> That's what I've been saying. If you HAVE a method of detecting
 JT> what type of compression is used, (the cuntbatch line) then USE
 JT> it. Put that in the gzip program.

  What *I* am saying is that each compressor has a way to identify
itself ALREADY! The cunbatch line does nothing. But if we are stuck
with it, then it ought to go in gzip (or whatever), as you say.

 JT> I've just read the GNU general public license, and it says you
 JT> can modify a program, but you must have clear notes that your
 JT> program is based on another whatever program, include the
 JT> source or make available the source, have the proper copyright
 JT> notices, and your work inherits the same GNU licence as the
 JT> original program you based your work on.

 JT> Public domain means you have the above rights, plus the next
 JT> person who picks it up can do WHATEVER they like with the
 JT> program and/or source. 

  No... Public Domain means *you* can do anything you like with it.
The PD right does not pass on. If I modify PD source, I can claim the
whole thing and sell it. There is *no* restriction on PD code. The gnu
appoach is to force the same licence right through.

  BTW, I don't think this gnu licence would be sustainable under law.
Everyone is entitled to the fruits of their labour and *forcing* you
to give it up is pretty dodgy. A contract is only enforceable is there
is a clear benefit on both sides. Arbitrary rules don't go very well
under Law. 

Regards,
Bob
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---