🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #75791

Re: Free Software Users == dupes ?

#75791
From: John Coolidge
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 1990 20:37
45 lines
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!coolidge
References: <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