[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL traitor !
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: GPL traitor ! |
Date: |
Sat, 9 May 2009 18:52:45 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-RELEASE (i386)) |
Good evening, Hadron!
In gnu.misc.discuss Hadron <hadronquark@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>> In gnu.misc.discuss Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
>>> You appear to believe that modifying the source of a GPLed program
>>> so that it invokes a function which is provided separately under a
>>> non-GPL license violates the GPL even when the modified program is
>>> distributed *as source*. Is that true?
>> No. If the invoked function is truly separate (e.g., calling an emailing
>> library function from GCC), it needn't be GPL'd. If the invoked
>> function is essentially a part of the calling program, it must also be
>> GPL.
> "essentially" : non definite.
Yes. Easy to understand, though, particularly with the illustrative
example.
>> This is covered by section 2 of GPL2 ("... and can be reasonably
>> considered independent and separate works in themselves ...") and
> "reasonably" : non definite.
Yes. Also easy to understand, at least for people experienced in
software development.
>> Copyright licenses for software do however deal with functionality.
>> Copyright law also has the notion of "derived works".
> Where were we on your assertions that the GPL is "easy" for anyone to
> understand?
:-) I suppose I asked for that. OK, it's not easy for everybody to
understand. It's easy to understand for intelligent people who want
to understand it.
> With all due respect Alan, your claims are looking more and more
> ridiculous. And each post you make reinforces just how incorrect and
> living in la-la land you were when you made those claims.
And now you've descended to ad hominem abuse. Fair enough, you don't
want to understand the GPL, and I can't make you, not that I'd want to.
But I'll ask you again. What's your interest in this matter? What's
your stake in the GPL? You seem to care about it a great deal. Or are
you just a totally disinterested outsider who, somehow, finds this
discussion intellectually stimulating?
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Re: GPL traitor !, (continued)
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hadron, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/05/09
- Re: GPL traitor !, Rjack, 2009/05/09
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hadron, 2009/05/09
- Re: GPL traitor !,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/10
- Re: GPL traitor !, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/05/11
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/11
- Re: GPL traitor !, Alan Mackenzie, 2009/05/11
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/11
- Re: GPL traitor !, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/05/11
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Kastrup, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hadron, 2009/05/08
- Re: GPL traitor !, Tim Smith, 2009/05/08