Fixed some typos

svn path=/trunk/; revision=7419

projects/gplv3/barcelona-moglen-transcript.en.xhtml

@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ into which GPL3 fits.
 <p id="gates-surrender">[Section: First: Bill Gates has surrendered]</p>
 
 <p class="indent">
-But the first thing I think I ougth to do, is to give you some news: Mr. Gates
+But the first thing I think I ought to do, is to give you some news: Mr. Gates
 has surrendered.
 </p>
 
@@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ moment you will see that in the torrent are a bunch of people &quot;distributing
 binaries&quot; who don't think of themselves as distributors, who think
 of themselves as users receiving the binary who have no source code and who
 haven't even got all the binary, yet. So that even if source code will later be part
-of the same torrent they're not guaranted to have it and they can't pass it
+of the same torrent they're not guaranteed to have it and they can't pass it
 along.
 </p>
 
@@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ getting great work out of people.
 </p>
 
 <p class="indent">
-This is true of the committees.  [inaudable short sentence] Committee
+This is true of the committees.  [inaudible short sentence] Committee
 members have spent dozens of hours, in some cases hundreds of hours,
 working on this licence.  They have spent a lot of time communicating,
 they have spent a lot of time refining ideas, they have spent lot of
@@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ law.
 I will say, therefore, the second discussion draft of GPL3 will not have any
 longer any dependency on the American copyright law idea of a &quot;derivative work&quot;.
 Accordingly we will be able to avoid another fifteen years of complaining from
-lawyers who quite justifibly thought the reliance on a US centric view of
+lawyers who quite justifiably thought the reliance on a US centric view of
 the derivative work was a major source of uncertainty and uneasiness. They may
 think that what we have done instead is not a perfect improvement, but I feel
 certain that there will at least be the recognition that it's a
@@ -1228,7 +1228,7 @@ I expect that US courts will be instructed on the intention of the licensor
 to reject the features of DMCA as it applies to GPL software. I expect the
 United States courts to listen closely to statements of the licensor's intent,
 because under US copyright law it is the licensor's intent which normatively
-determines the content of licene.
+determines the content of license.
 </p>
 
 <p class="indent">
@@ -1896,9 +1896,9 @@ restriction, not negative about restriction.
 </p>
 
 <p class="indent">
-The position being taken is &quot;to have a community requires some minimun
+The position being taken is &quot;to have a community requires some minimal
 restrictions to preserve community&quot;. We tend to see the other side's
-view of that question &quot;there ought to be no restriction except those
+view of that question &quot;there ought to be no restrictions except those
 which are inevitable&quot; as too libertarian to be firmly communal.  If
 you want to keep a community in being you may have to say &quot;clean up
 after your dog on the sidewalk&quot;. Yeah, it's a restriction on use, but
@@ -1933,14 +1933,14 @@ that they wanted users and customers to have
 
 <p class="indent">
 So over the course of decades, a copyright licence ceased to be only a licence,
-and became very largely a contract for customer's obligations, because the
+and became very largely a contract for customers' obligations, because the
 customer's obligations were a big part of what the party writing the licence,
 which wasn't the customer, wanted to see in there.
 </p>
 
 <p class="indent">
 We came along and said &quot;We don't even want all of what copyright gives us, let
-alone that we want anything else&quot;, so we can use a pure licence, because most of
+alone do we want anything else&quot;, so we can use a pure licence, because most of
 what we want to do is to give away copyright law, and no part of what we want to
 do is to take additional obligations from people that aren't within the scope of
 copyright law.
@@ -1960,11 +1960,11 @@ away from them using contracts, where what you're giving them is just
 a program to run.  It's in the nature of the criticism we were making
 of the legal institutions being used by others, that we were calling
 attention to a thing which had happened barely consciously, and which
-is still a kind of unreleased restriction in some people's mind.
+is still a kind of unreleased restriction in some people's minds.
 </p>
 
 <p class="indent">
-Alright, thank you very much, I appreciated it.
+Alright, thank you very much, I appreciate it.
 </p>