Re: Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation of the GPL
On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 06:21:54PM -0700, Richard Stallman wrote:
> you can not sublicense, mix with non-free code neither by libs nor corba
> If copyright does consider this a single combined work,
> then the GPL itself has this consequence.
> If copyright law does not consider "combining with CORBA" to make a
> single combined work, then a copyright-based license cannot
> validly contain this criterion.
You may license what end-user will do with the code however you want.
You may license that this code cant be used on Fridays for example.
> Either way, there is no need to add this condition.
> you have to include the note `This distro is partially made of free software'
> in all ads of distros mixed from either free and non-free code
> Since the required sentence does not contain the author's name, this
> does not cause the same practical problems as the BSD advertising clause.
This is only to be sure that they will tell their users about
that some of it is really free, its not next MS-Windows, nor MacOS
> However, it shares with the BSD advertising clause the characteristic
> of being probably unenforcible under US law (though it may be
> enforcible in some countries).
> Also, it would be incompatible with the GPL.
I only want this EXAMPLE to be the-most aggresively-free DFSG-compatibile license
I DO NOT like this license
Evyrything I have ever written was GPL, Artistic or pd
The biggest problem with GPL is that it is completely unreadable ;)