Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 11:11:27 -0700 From: Johnson David <djohnson@acuson.com> To: James Michael DuPont <mdupont777@yahoo.com>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman stalls again Message-ID: <200206271111.27952.djohnson@acuson.com> In-Reply-To: <20020627093141.48702.qmail@web13302.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020627093141.48702.qmail@web13302.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 27 June 2002 02:31 am, James Michael DuPont wrote: > I am currently involved in a similar situation. > My introspector project extracts the ASTS out of the compiler into XML, > I am getting hostile mails from the gcc/fsf group. The basic problem here (I think) is that "extracting" anything out of the compiler, other than what it normally outputs, will create a derivative work. It is another form of translation, which is covered by copyright law. You have the permission to do so under the GPL, if the resulting XML extraction is also under the GPL. GNU is a funny organization. Among their various beliefs is that utilizations of loopholes in the GPL are not permitted. They may feel (my guess) that your XML extraction is a "loophole". You cannot write a non-GPL program that directly extracts the ASTS out of the compiler. But your XML extraction can be used by a non-GPL program for the same thing. Thus, they may feel that your project (again, my guess) is an end run, or can be used as an end run, around the GPL, by non-GPL programs. > It seems that there are not any real rules on this, > only FUD and opinions from the side of the people trying to stop all > "Dangerous" patches to the gcc. I don't think your project violates the GPL at all. I am confident that copyright law and the wording of the GPL allows this. But that won't stop the FSF from suing to prove otherwise. That latter point is all important. The FSF doesn't need to be right, they just need to be able to outlast you in a court of law. Your only defense, as I see it, is to convince enough people associated with GNU that your project is not in violation of the GPL. In order to do this, you must argue from the perspective of the GNU Philosophy, and not logic, law, rights or anything else. > I will be meeting with rms about this soon and need to know his > arguments from the past. He has sent me almost identical mails as well, > I think that I will have to fight over this. Having been in discussions with RMS before, I know that once he has made up his mind on an issue, he will never change it no matter what. If he gets it into his head that your project can be used as an end run around the GPL, you will have lost. One of RMS's overriding concerns is the GNU Project itself. He actually opposes the Uniform Driver Interface because it would benefit Windows users more than GNU users. So keep that in mind. cheers, David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200206271111.27952.djohnson>