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

Re: GNU License and Computer Break Ins

Paul Serice wrote:
> At http://www.gnu.org/manual/ddd/html_mono/ddd.html , the DDD license
> states as follows:
>       The easiest way to get a copy of DDD is from someone else who
>       has it.  You need not ask for permission to do so, or tell any
>       one else; just copy it.

The entirety of http://www.gnu.org/manual/ddd/html_mono/ddd.html is
_not_ the license of GDB. The page also says stuff like 

  You can further control how DDD starts up using the following options.
  All options may be abbreviated, as long as they are unambiguous; single
  dashes - instead of double dashes -- may also be used. Almost all options
  control a specific DDD resource or resource class (see Customizing). 

I hope you arn't claiming that that's part of the license, and thus
running gdb with some options not listed there is illegal. :-p

GDB's license is just the GPL, specifically, it is the section marked "Note:
License" on that page.

The text you quotes is not part of the license, and so it's not legally
binding. It's just an explination of the GPL, which allows you to copy
any GPL'd program you find.

> Let's say someone breaks into my home computer for the express purpose
> of getting a copy of DDD from me.
> Are they wrong for taking it?  Are they even wrong for the break-in?

Say someone breaks into my house for the express purpose of breathing
the air. The air is free, but they're still breaking and entering. It's
still against the law. Get your air elsewhere, it's all over. So's the
GDB source code. 

> Before answering the next question consider the following quote also
> from the GNU license of DDD:
>       What is not allowed is to try to prevent others from further
>       sharing any version of DDD that they might get from you.

Again, this quote is not part of the license of GDB. 

see shy jo

Reply to: