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: thomas@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Thomas Bushnell, n/BSG) Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say? Date: 1997/06/30 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 253660149 References: <33B014E3.3343@no.such.com> <5oqp9s$7vj$1@news.nyu.edu> <33B13BF6.79C7@no.such.com> <33B2ABA6.2A44C487@link.com> <33B42D26.75A2@link.com> Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss Date: 1997-06-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Samuel Mize writes: > It's meaningless. He's doing a specific task assigned by a > company. The task is "build this program, in this language, > on this platform." He can't change the constraints on his own. > One of those constraints is to avoid GPL'd code. But he chooses to do that task and to accept such assignments. Nobody other than himself is responsible for his being in this situation. > If you were to say that he's working for unprincipled people and > should quit, it would at least have meaning. Saying that he "can" > use GPL'd code does not. That might be the best choice; I'm not trying to tell him what his choices should be, however. I just want to point out that he DOES have this choice. He cannot place his decision about who to work for above all criticism, and then place the onus on the FSF for "not helping him". Thomas