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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: user@yellow.submarine.pla ()
Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say?
Date: 1997/06/29
Message-ID: <5p50av$65i@camel3.mindspring.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 253364019
References: <m2oh8ydzt8.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> <dewar.867079112@merv>
 		<33B014E3.3343@no.such.com> <5oqp9s$7vj$1@news.nyu.edu>
 		<33B13BF6.79C7@no.such.com> <dewar.867337719@merv>
 		<33B2ABA6.2A44C487@link.com> <sz0k9jh84e9.fsf@sugar-bombs.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
 <33B2EC92.228@does.not.exist.com> <dewar.867380006@merv>
Organization: Yellow Brick Road
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-06-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.867380006@merv>, Robert Dewar wrote:
>This is still an odd way of saying things ("incompatible with the GPL")
>
>The proper viewpoint is the following.
>
>I am writing a program
>I could simplify my job if I could use this code
>However, this code is copyrighted
>I do not have permission to copy the code
>Therefore I cannot use it
>
>
Seems pretty simple when expressed that way.  I think an obstacle to 
adopting this view point is that the GPL'd code seems to be right in
your face mocking you!  Nobody seems to have the same problem  with
say Windows95 source code that they'll never see anyway.  

Isaac