Re: Combining proprietary code and GPL for in-house use
On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 06:42:22PM -0400, Chloe Hoffman wrote:
> For example, consider the earlier condition in almost all open source
> licenses that "force" the user to "speak" the license notice, the
> disclaimer, etc.; consider clauses that requires the insertion of
> trademark or patent notices; consider any agreement that requires a
> publisher to publish a novel; etc. etc.
Requiring that the license remain attached to the copyrighted work
is very different from requiring boilerplate material be inserted in
non-copyrighted works (which, in the Debian context, would typically be
prepared and distributed by only vaugely affiliated parties).
Or do you have examples to the contrary?
> The linking issue is a whole other matter. I am saying there that an
> end-user has, subject to and in compliance with the GPL license terms, a
> wide right to modify on the end-user's computer.
I believe you're talking about fair use.
Does fair use apply when 10000 users wind up with identical unlicensed
copies of the same copyrighted work?
> I am trying to understand the basis for infringement where the user
> combines GPL code on the end-user's computer with another non-GPL
> program under broad modification/combination rights provided by the
> GPL (in the matter under consideration a non-GPL program and GPL
> library linked thereto).
Copyright doesn't care how the copies are made. It doesn't care
about unique individual actions. It does "care" about large-scale