[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

From: Rui Miguel Seabra
Subject: Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:23:49 +0100

On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 12:07 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Barak Zalstein wrote:
> [...]
> > While creating a mixture of GPL, BSD, CPL, other similarly licensed
> > source files and linking them together seems to not violate user
> > freedoms, CPL marked as incompatible by is good enough reason to
> > say no thanks.
> "GPL incompatibility" is a myth. With respect to the CPL (and also
> EPL, ASL, OSL, etc.) it simply means that RMS hates patents. You should
> read this (and follow all the embedded links; recursively ;-) ):

No it's not a myth, and this proves again you are on a religious crusade
against the GPL and the FSF.

The FSF states in the site about the GPL/CPL incompatibility:

Common Public License Version 1.0
        This is a free software license but it is incompatible with the
        The Common Public License is incompatible with the GPL because
        it has various specific requirements that are not in the GPL.
        For example, it requires certain patent licenses be given that
        the GPL does not require. (We don't think those patent license
        requirements are inherently a bad idea, but nonetheless they are
        incompatible with the GNU GPL.)

(1) is why it is incompatible, you can't place extra restrictions on a
GPL'ed work, and you're recasting the work, so you have to respect the
author's condition for recasting: use of the GNU GPL

(2) They don't see the CPL as bad because of patent conditions, they're
just stating that since restrictions are added, they are incompatible
with the current version of the GNU GPL.

Eat my dust 'lex.


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

reply via email to

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