[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DFSG Par. 9 and GPL "Virulogical" effekt

On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 05:57:03PM +0200, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2000, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > The paragraph says "License Must NOT Contaminate Other Software".
> > As Debian and the FSF agree that the GPL and QPL are incompatible
> > and this is mainly the cause of the GPL which requires "the whole work"
> > distributed under "THIS license" this means a contamination into other
> > "programs" read: QT2 
>    Distributing a GPLed program and QT2 on the same medium is perfectly
> legal, thus there is no contamination. What is not tolerated is mixing
> QT2 and some GPL code to form a new piece of software. One might call
> this contamination, but it does not contaminate _other_ software.

Ah - ok - So you mean the "contamination" clause does only apply to completely
unrelated programs (In the means of software development not
in the means of filesystems ).

    9. License Must Not Contaminate Other Software
       The license must not place restrictions on other software that is
       distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the
       license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the
       same medium must be free software.

"distributed along" does not give an exact definition of the relation
the 2 programs may have for a "legal contamination" like in the GPL
vs. QPL issue.

Florian Lohoff		flo@rfc822.org		      	+49-subject-2-change
"Technology is a constant battle between manufacturers producing bigger and
more idiot-proof systems and nature producing bigger and better idiots."

Reply to: