IP: GNU license controversy

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> X-Sender: dvb () pop panix com
> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
> Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:46:49 -0400
> To: dave () farber net
> From: Dave Burstein <daveb () dslprime com>
> Subject: GNU license controversy
>
> Dave - Not sure if this is worth posting to the list, but I think some of 
> the comments I've seen come across are misinterpretations.
>
> Dave
>
> I'm not in the middle of the open source debate, but what has been coming 
> across the IP list didn't sound right to me, so I went back to the GNU 
> license itself. It doesn't appear to me to restrict programmers charging 
> for their work, as implied in the discussion. Rather, it seems to prevent 
> making small changes to software, and charging for the work of others.
>
> In particular, it looks to me that if you write a program that extends, 
> say, GNU Emacs, you can sell that program however you like. You just can't 
> bundle Emacs with it (someone else's work, after all), and charge for the 
> entire package. I'm reading the sentence below  that if "sections of that 
> work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered 
> independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its 
> terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate 
> works."
>
> Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I don't see how that prevents a programmer 
> from appropriately packaging and charge for her work.
>
> Relevant text
>
> "These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable 
> sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be 
> reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then 
> this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you 
> distribute them as separate works. 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.
> Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your 
> rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise 
> the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works 
> based on the Program."



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/