Date: 17 Dec 2001 17:42:01 -0800 From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) To: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <qpheqp1eza.eqp@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20011217183103.K377@prism.flugsvamp.com> References: <local.mail.freebsd-chat/3C19807D.C441F084@mindspring.com> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/4.3.2.7.2.20011214175450.02da2a90@localhost> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/4.3.2.7.2.20011215232233.00e74cc0@localhost> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/4.3.2.7.2.20011216221810.031b6820@localhost> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/4.3.2.7.2.20011217001345.00e26280@localhost> <local.mail.freebsd-chat/20011217185738.N14500@monorchid.lemis.com> <200112171739.fBHHdJj86694@prism.flugsvamp.com> <293d2935g7.d29@localhost.localdomain> <20011217160411.G377@prism.flugsvamp.com> <5dpu5d1j1y.u5d@localhost.localdomain> <20011217183103.K377@prism.flugsvamp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com> writes: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 04:14:01PM -0800, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > > > > Note the "a work containing the Program or a portioin of it" part. > > (There's no need to argue about the interpretation of the word "based" > > as you propose.) Why is a Red Hat (or FreeBSD) software compilation on > > CD not a "work based on the [GPL'd] Program"? (It is also a collective > > work, since it contains publisher-owned work, and is definitely worthy > > of copyrights.) And like I said, you then have to the GPL to try to > > learn if it allows distribution as part of such a work without infecting > > the other work. That's debatable and reliance on any conclusion is > > legally risky. Acceptably so in the case of things like gcc and binutils > > where the owners have made us feel comfortable that they will continue > > to allow such use regardless of the GPL. Also acceptably so for much > > other software because of the common (mis?)understanding of the GPL > > which holds certain uses (like in collective works) non-viral so that > > the risk of being sued is small. > > > > So it is law and the language of the GPL that you should find absurd. > > Note that the law is not as clearcut as you make it seem. You can > argue it your way, and I can argue it my way, but until the matter > is actually decided by the courts, either interpretation may be correct. Ridiculous and absurd, but maybe correct. Well, I guess that's somthing. > Trivial example: remember those ski lift tickets that said something to ... Yes, of course the GPL may contain unenforcable restrictions. But the prudent person will assume that it doesn't until a court finds that does. > Note that the courts, in deciding how a law/license should be interpreted, > take into account the intent of the person(s) writing the license. In > this case, the author is Richard Stallman. I believe that Greg has already > asked for clarification, and has posted Mr Stallman's answer - in which > he states that the GPL does *NOT* apply in your scenario. Courts are supposed to take into account the words and the understanding of each parties to the license contract of what each is agreeing to (and also the words themselves). Stallman's opinion should be irrelevant except to the extent that it influences the just-referred-to understandings. Sadly, in practice, a judge's personal biases are likely to be influenced by Stallman's opinion while researching what the words mean and what the common understanding of the GPL might be. > Now, in lieu of the courts making a decision, I would say that this is > the closest you're going to get to an authoritative answer. An answer to what? We don't expect an authoritative answer to the meaning of the GPL, even after low-level courts rule on it. What we're trying to determine is the level of legal and practical risks involved in some uses of GPL'd code and, considering that, what use should be made of GPL'd code with FreeBSD. The authoritive answer to that will be in the minds of a relative few FreeBSD core people and I expect to only see the results, but I suppose opinions are welcome on -chat. P.S. Please educate yourself as to Mr. Stallman's trustworthiness in regards to the applicability of the GPL to which you referred above. http://www.progressive-comp.com/Lists/?l=berlin-design&m=93118897023514&w=2 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?qpheqp1eza.eqp>