From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Dec 17 18:23:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1934D37B41D for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:23:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEBBEBF9D; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:23:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA22446; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:23:13 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBI2O3730057; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:24:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: GB Clark II Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) References: <20011217160411.G377@prism.flugsvamp.com> <5dpu5d1j1y.u5d@localhost.localdomain> <01121718324202.65128@prime.vsservices.com> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 17 Dec 2001 18:24:03 -0800 In-Reply-To: <01121718324202.65128@prime.vsservices.com> Message-ID: <1dd71d1d18.71d@localhost.localdomain> Lines: 36 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org GB Clark II writes: > Also from the GPL: > > "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program > with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of > a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under > the scope of this License." > > Just being on a CD with other stuff does not put the entire CD under the GPL. That's only true if you believe your GPL quote over-rules this GPL quote: But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it. I don't know how a lawyer or any random GPL licensor would harmonize those two passages. I'd guess the same way you do, but it's just a guess. FUD reigns. I think that your GPL quote allows dynamic AND static linking without contamination if it allows the form of linking which occurs when collecting works on a CD. Copyright law doesn't distinguish between executable object module collections and unexecutable source module collections, AFAIK. The same theory that finds linking viral could find compilation viral. People don't want to hear it, but nobody explains why it isn't so. > All of this has hashed years ago back at the very begining of the Project. And ever since, probably. You don't mind if we develop our own opinions by chatting about it, I hope. (Though I may be overdoing it a bit. I'll try to cut down on it.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message