[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNU License, Again

From: mike3
Subject: Re: GNU License, Again
Date: 22 May 2007 12:05:12 -0700
User-agent: G2/1.0

On May 22, 2:05 am, "Alfred M. Szmidt" <> wrote:
>    On May 21, 4:21 pm, David Kastrup <> wrote:
>    > mike3 <> writes:
>    > > He would not have to "bargain" for any copy of the GPL program.  And
>    > > it (the GPL program) would not have a different license -- the only
>    > > thing that has a different license is the non-GPL program.
>    >
>    > But the non-GPL program has no use of its own.
>    >
>    Oh, since it depends _vitally_ on the GPL one.
>    > >> The GPL is intended to guarantee the freedom of the code itself
>    > >> _and_ descendants.
>    >
>    > > And the non-GPL code suddenly then becomes a "descendant" of the GPL
>    > > code the instant it is made dependent on the GPL code in _any_ way,
>    > > shape, or form?
>    >
>    > No.  The linked executable containing both parts is the descendant.
>    > And the court may very well decide that you are in effect performing
>    > distribution of this descendant if your code has no other viable
>    > purpose, and if there is no viable non-GPLed source.
>    >
>    So then even if both are _not_ linked together, since one
>    _vitally_ depends on the other, then it is considered a single
>    program regardless of separate distribution of the components.
>    It seems then that the GNU license is designed not just to protect
>    a piece of free code's freedom, but to _create more free code_.
> It is meant to protect free software so that free software stays free.
> If you use a library, and a non-free program, the end result is not
> free software, and the GPL protects us from people who wish to do
> mischeif like that.

But the free software is the GPL program -- how does it protect
free software by requiring that the non-GPL one become GPL
as well? The free software is only the GPL program -- which
can function on it's own, unlike the non-GPL program, and if all
sources to said GPL program are divulged under GPL, then how
is it made any less free? It isn't!!!

So, it's to create *more* free code, right?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]