From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d0f6c37e3c1b712a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!statler.nntpserver.com!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:20:13 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Organization: elsewhere
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Macintosh/20060530)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: AdaCore ... the Next SCO?
References: <1151405920.523542.137920@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
 <ugi7n3-9it.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
 <1151413996.881418.65260@x69g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>
 <2418185.2jO2KLhFBO@linux1.krischik.com> <1151431127.2179.20.camel@localhost>
 <xx1wtam8j0.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <m2r719zu9v.fsf@grendel.local>
 <1151480714.730898.137230@d56g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>
 <kh3bdp5syj.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1244422.yFQ0DYx6Pb@linux1.krischik.com> <m2ac7v4mz7.fsf@grendel.local>
 <26189111.gnGsLyd49d@linux1.krischik.com>
In-Reply-To: <26189111.gnGsLyd49d@linux1.krischik.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <44a62ff5$0$29149$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 01 Jul 2006 10:19:01 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: d698b76a.newsread4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=PN[2LEPe0IK^a1SS:=Ik]J:ejgIfPPldDjW\KbG]kaMHLL]:kiR8f=OOIe623@PaeIhP3YJKgE\jLaWoMIdPfi[@_oHF]]1bjGI
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5377
Date: 2006-07-01T10:19:01+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Martin Krischik wrote:

> You combine three different licences to link closed source to GPL:
> 
> GPL <-> totally_free_licence <-> closed_source_licence.

If is_derived_work(outcome(GPL <-> "totally_free_licence" <-> closed_source_licence))
then
   sources_must_be_available;
end;

How could an indirect call, closed( don_t_care( gpl(...))), work around
the fact that closed(), when called, will execute the code
that implements gpl()?

GPL: "We offer our services to anyone, provided they agree to L"
DONTCARE: "We offer our services to anyone, in any way for any use."

Now DONTCARE hires a GPLed service. The service works as part of one of
DONTCARE's own service functions. Someone notices this and starts asking
questions. What answers will she get?

CLOSED: "We only have a contract with DONTCARE. None of our business
  what they did"
DONTCARE: ________

Is CLOSED right?
Fill in the blanks. :-)

-- Georg