Re: what DOES the GPL really say?

[kai@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)]

dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)  wrote on 26.06.97 in <dewar.867380006@merv>:

> Wes says
>
> <<1. I was trying to meet a set of requirements.  One of those
>    requirements was incompatible with the GPL.  Saying "yes you can"
>    is the same as saying "no that's not a requirement." and doesn't
>    help me meet that requirement.
> >>
>
> 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

How about a compromise solution?

"The GPL doesn't allow me to use the code in this specific context."

Because that's what the GPL does, allowing people to use the code in  
specific contexts.

(The GPL does not forbid any use. The copyright laws forbid (most) use  
unless the copyright owner allows them, and the GPL is what does the  
allowing with GPL'd code. Without the GPL (or another license), nearly any  
use would be illegal.) (Nearly? Yes, nearly. Some uses are allowed by law.  
Read the law, or ask an intellectual property lawyer. IANAL, so I'll only  
provide the pointer.)

Just to be clear: I assume that Robert understands this, but some other  
people seem to have trouble with this concept.

> Note that the holder of the copyright may always give you MORE permission
> than the GPL allows, the GPL gives certain permissions to everyone other
> than the copyright holder. But the holder can do anything they like.
>
> Now it is true in practice that if the holder is FSF, they are pretty
> unlikely to give you permission for a usage that is inconsistent with
> the GPL, but who knows there could be some circumstances in which it
> would seem appropriate (I think allowing Wes to use it in proprietary
> software that his company intends to hoard is likely NOT one of these
> circumstances :-)

Another note, there are cases (like the Linux kernel) where there isn't  
one single copyright holder, but instead several hundreds. You _might_ get  
some additional license from these, but don't bet your house on it ...

Kai
--
Internet: kai@khms.westfalen.de
Bang: major_backbone!khms.westfalen.de!kai
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/