Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

[Rui Miguel Seabra]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 17:06 +0000, Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 13:28:28 +0200, Martin Dickopp ("Martin") writes:
> 
>  Martin> cstacy@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) writes:
>  >> Eben's other assertion is that the GPL is a license contract
> 
>  Martin> Such an assertion would be in direct contrast to various of his
>  Martin> writings, e.g. <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html>.
>  Martin> Can you please provide a reference where he said that the GPL is
>  Martin> a contract?
> 
> A key point in Moglen's arguments, presented in the affidavit that he
> submitted in the PROGRESS case that I cited, is the intent of the license.
> We are speaking of "enforcing" an "agreement".

That is a fundamental minsunderstanding of the GNU GPL.
There is no agreement to be enforced.

The GNU GPL is 100% uni-directional.
You have permission to do certain things in a certain way, or you do
not. You simply aren't allowed to do it.

There's no "I Agree" button.

You don't have to agree with those conditions, because there are no
restrictions on the puropose of running the software.

However, to distribute you have to do it in the specified conditions...
or you can't by default of copyright law.

Rui

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part