From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Dec 22 17:15:22 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 346BF37B405 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:15:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F19FBD06; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:15:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA16071; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:15:15 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBN1FWR70715; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:15:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Nicolas Rachinsky Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GPL nonsense: time to stop References: <200112182010.fBIKA9739621@prism.flugsvamp.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011218180720.00d6e520@localhost> <20011219091631.Q377@prism.flugsvamp.com> <0en10ey5jo.10e@localhost.localdomain> <20011219215548.D76354@prism.flugsvamp.com> <20011220171739.J26326@prism.flugsvamp.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011221131016.00d3dcc0@localhost> <20011221150930.A78601@prism.flugsvamp.com> <20011221212606.GB17204@pc5.abc> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 22 Dec 2001 17:15:32 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20011221212606.GB17204@pc5.abc> Message-ID: <4azo4au47f.o4a@localhost.localdomain> Lines: 29 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 Nicolas Rachinsky writes: > Just a question, there is an version of the BSD license which is > incompatible with the GPL, which means I can't distribute a work with > has both licenses. In the following I call this (incompatible) BSD > license BSDL. > > If I have an program licensed with the BSDL, I'm not the > author/copyright owner of. I have a source file which is GPL'd. If > I combine this two for example by linking them together, I create > a derivated work of both the source files. The GPL requires me to > license the whole work under the GPL, which I can't do, so every > distribution of the whole work in binary (and perhaps in source) is > illegal. > > Is this correct? What is the nature of the linking? Do you own the GPL'd work? Are the parts dependent on each other causing a "technical interpenetration"? Does the combination satisfy the GPL's "mere aggregation" escape clause? Lots of debatable stuff some of which you might never answer surely. But it is probably correct in most cases. And only a lawyer may give you legal advice, so don't consider my opinion as anything but a lay comment on an hypothetical scenario. > Are all the linux distributers violating copyright law? Why do you ask? Care to share some evidence of it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message