Bernd Warken <email@example.com> writes:
> 2) The copyleft sign is not a logo, but a functional character analoguously
> to the copyright sign. This has been discussed in length and proved amply.
> We shouldn't iterate eaten stuff like the cows do.
As has been noted, there is no juridical concept "copyleft" in the same
way as there is something well-defined called "copyright". In fact,
unless I have missed something, "copyleft" is completely void from
a juridical standpoint.
While an attempt to dress up like something else, the sign is for all
practical purposes a logotype.
-- Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:03 EDT