Re: gEDA-user: Re: Comment on free technology please

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> That part of the GPL is designed to prevent this kind of scenario: A
> developer has a set of sources, runs it through a preprocessor, and
> then runs it through a filter which replaces meaningful names like
> "schematic_flags" with machine generated meaningless names like
> "var0567_b" in order to effectively prevent people from modifying the
> code (by making it too difficult to be practical).  It also prevents
> the developer from using a higher-level language (like the FSF's
> "cgen") to machine-generate a C source file, then distribute only the
> machine-generated C source file.

What if the developer is a hypertrophed genius and doesn't mean if he uses this
form or the original one and really uses this for his editation?  Then he won't
breach GPL although it will be unusable for the others.

And he can claim he is a reverse-engineering specialist and he has translated
the C source into machine language because he actually loves machine code and
he uses it for editation (and actually is just a thief stealing GPL code and
making binary proprietary applications). You can't prove someone isn't a
genius. He may be a hidden genius and he isn't obliged to demonstrate you that
he is a genius if he is one.

Shouldn't this be formulated as not for the particular author but for average
developer public?

Cl<