gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: GPL traitor !


From: Hadron
Subject: Re: GPL traitor !
Date: Sat, 09 May 2009 17:27:43 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux)

Erik Funkenbusch <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, 09 May 2009 10:43:09 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>>> Funny, but even YOU don't seem to understand the GPL that nobody could
>>> possibly misunderstand.  Or maybe it's the FSF that doesn't understand
>>> it.
>> 
>> Or maybe you don't have a clue what "outside its scope" means.  The FSF
>> is talking about the applicability of copyright law.  The contents of
>> the GPL are not at issue here.
>
> The GPL is useless without copyright law.  The two are entertwined.  You
> cannot understand the GPL without understanding copyright law, thus the
> "contents fo the GPL" includes copyright law, because the GPL is a
> "derivitive work" of it.
>
>> Absolutely the same scope problem occurs
>> for the BSD license.
>
> But since the BSD license enforces no restrictions on you, other than
> leaving copyright clauses in the source code and not sueing them, and does
> not depend on the definition of "derivitive work" in copyright law, the BSD
> license does not have the same problems.
>
>>> Actually, no.  The GPL says nothing about charging for the license.
>> 
>> Huh?  Check out chapter 6 in the current GPL version, and search for the
>> string "at no".  There are about 4 instances or so of that, where "at no
>> further charge" and its equivalent are mentioned.  Chapter 6 is about
>> conveying binaries, and it makes repeatedly clear that access and
>> license to the source code then have to be provided without additional
>> charge.
>
> I'm speaking about GPLv2.  v3 with all it's "conveyance" crap is even
> worse, but I don't know it well enough to comment much on it.
>
>>> You cannot understand the GPL without understanding the wider chaos of
>>> copyright law.  That's why the GPL is not easy to understand.
>> 
>> Since that applies to any license, it's disingenuous to blame the GPL
>> for that specifically.
>
> I'm not.  I'm blaming the people that say it's impossible to misunderstand
> the GPL.

Surely they are not still claiming that after being proven to not
understand it themselves in this very thread?


-- 
In view of all the deadly computer viruses that have been spreading
lately, Weekend Update would like to remind you: when you link up to
another computer, you’re linking up to every computer that that
computer has ever linked up to. — Dennis Miller


reply via email to

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