Re: BSD license, core libraries, and NetBSD

[tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)]

Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 07:51:19PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> 
> > > Do we know for a fact that:
> 
> > > a) the FSF is aware that the NetBSD folks ships gcc with their operating
> > >    system,
> > > b) the FSF is aware that the NetBSD code that gcc links against is still
> > >    old-style BSD,
> > > c) the FSF has *explicitly stated* that NetBSD can legally ship gcc with
> > >    their OS under these circumstances
> 
> > I know (a) for a fact, and I know that it was perfectly well aware of
> > (b) as well, at least before BSD announced its change.
> 
> > The FSF's position is that the noxious advertising clause is not
> > enforceable in the United States, and so, in the US at least, is not
> > in conflict with the GPL.
> 
> Thank you for that clarification.  I'm not sure where that puts Debian,
> however, if the legality of this is based on the particulars of US law.

Debian's usual rule has been to think about general international law.

However, I think in certain cases, it's worth being a little, um,
gentle in our application.  I think the present situation is such a
case.

I think it's worth moving slowly, and thinking very carefully about
what we hope to accomplish before making any significant moves.