Re: SUN RPC code is DFSG-free
Fedor Zuev <Fedor_zuev@mail.ru> writes:
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>>I thought I'd been following this discussion, but it seems to have
>>branched off into a discussion of originality. Unless I'm horribly
>>confused (which, as always, is possible) originality is absolutely
>>irrelevant to the Sun RPC code, because work derived from it is,
>>well, derived from it, and therefore clearly not original. (If I
>>am confused, I'd personally appreciate a recap that would explain
>>the connection, as I've gone back and reread the past few messages
>>and the connection is still opaque to me.)
[snip]
> One can argue, that separation of SUN RPC from GLIBS do not
> contribute enough (any) originality to constitute creation of new
> original work of authorship.
If that is the case, the license could claim that you must commit
ritual suicide and the work would still be free. But I don't think it
would be a good idea for Debian to depend on the work not being
copyrightable when clearly Sun thinks it is.
>>2) If the answer to (1) is no, is that restriction compatible with
>> the GPL?
>
> Maybe.
>
> GPL defines "work based on the Program" twice:
>
> First, it clearly refers to "derivative work under copyright
> law"
>
> ----------------------
> The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work,
> and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any
> derivative work under copyright law.
> ----------------------
>
> Second, it refer only to "modify" itself
>
> ----------------------
> You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any
> portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy
> and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section
> 1 above
> ----------------------
>
> Under first definition, all OK. Under second - maybe not.
I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say here.
--
Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
Reply to: