Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #75791Re: Free Software Users == dupes ?
From: John Coolidge
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 1990 20:37
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 1990 20:37
45 lines
3243 bytes
3243 bytes
jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) writes: >/ gnu.misc.discuss / coolidge@casca.cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) / Mar 29 1990 / >> Isn't it entirely possible for someone to come up with >> libg++ (for instance) compatible libraries which are Truly Free >> Software (or, on the other hand, proprietary software)? >The difference is precisely that if you create (or obtain) a library that >is plug-compatible with libg++, you can link with it instead of libg++, and >your program will be a derivative of that library and subject to the >licensing terms of that library and not libg++. You are NOT prevented from >writing software that duplicates the interface of GNU software. That is >the difference. That's true. So, if someone was to sell object code to their program, and say "link this with libg++, or any other compatible library, or write a compatible library with this interface, and you'll have a working program", that wouldn't violate the copyleft, right? That seems to be the implication. In any case, the linker and not the publisher will be the one creating the derivative work, and they're allowed to do so for their own use. >In other words, if you ship a partial product that needs GNU *CODE* to be >complete, you are not fooling anybody, and the GNU license applies. On the >other hand, if the GNU code is just one of the options to complete the >product, then the product is subject to the GNU license only if you use the >GNU code. How can the GPL apply to any code that doesn't include GPL-covered code, even if it requires GPL-covered code to function? The GPL- covered code will be added by a third party. You're right --- the vendor wouldn't be fooling anyone, that's true --- but "not fooling anyone" is a public-opinion statement. Legally, there's not much you could accuse them of. They haven't used _any_ GPL-covered code. How, legally, could the GPL somehow become attached to their code, unless the GPL-covered code's _interface_ was covered by the GPL? There's no GPL-code inclusion --- the interface _has_ to be the part that ties the protected code to the GPL. There's no other handle to grab onto. --John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- John L. Coolidge Internet:coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP:uiucdcs!coolidge Of course I don't speak for the U of I (or anyone else except myself) Copyright 1990 John L. Coolidge. Copying allowed if (and only if) attributed. You may redistribute this article if and only if your recipients may as well.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1990Mar30.203732.25904@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!coolidgeReferences:
<GUMBY.90Mar27101752@cygnus.COM> <970013@gore.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1a1f932bc12166f3 X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1990-03-30 12:37:32 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!coolidge From: coolidge@casca.cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: Free Software Users == dupes ? Message-ID: <1990Mar30.203732.25904@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> Date: 30 Mar 90 20:37:32 GMT References: <GUMBY.90Mar27101752@cygnus.COM> <970013@gore.com> Sender: news@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu Reply-To: coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu Organization: U of Illinois, CS Dept., Systems Research Group Lines: 45 Posted: Fri Mar 30 21:37:32 1990