Re: what DOES the GPL really say?

[Samuel Mize <smize@link.com>]

[quotations reformatted for line length]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Wes says
> 
> <<However, that is not what people have been telling me.
>  Several times I have been reprimanded for saying I cannot
>  incorporate a particular bit of code due to the GPL.
> >>
> 
> Huh? This is like saying you have been reprimanded for refusing to
> make an illicit copy of proprietary software. Whoever is doing the
> reprimanding here is either incompetent, or does not mind if their
> company violates copyrights.

I believe that he's saying that people on the net have reprimanded
him (carped at him) for saying the GLP doesn't allow him to
incorporate GPL'd source code.  "Of course you can incorporate it,"
they say, "you just have to follow the rules about distributing it."

However, his company refuses to distribute the sources for their
product.  So, since he can't distribute it appropriately, he says
he can't incorporate it.

But some people go into a religious frenzy if you say you "can't"
incorporate GPL'd code into your product.  You CAN, they say, but
your company CHOOSES not to because of the distribution requirement.

However, company decisions are constraints on what we engineers
can do.  I can't change the brand of computer we use; I can't
write Lisp or Forth code for our systems; I can't incorporate
GPL'd code. At least, I can't do so and still be doing the job
they're paying me to do.

For that matter, you CAN make an illicit copy of proprietary
software, too, and some people claim to be striking a blow for
intellectual freedom by using a stolen copy of Excel.  I disagree.

Sam Mize

--
-- Samuel Mize    (817) 619-8622    smize@link.com    "Team Ada"
-- Hughes Training Inc.  PO Box 6171 m/s 400, Arlington TX 76005