Re: DFSG Par. 9 and GPL "Virulogical" effekt
On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 06:21:48PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > So the GPL (or QT) license does not "contaminate" until someone actively
> > makes a derived work that combines the (formely seperate) programs.
> > But as long as they are really seperate programs (or contain a special
> > exception) they can (and Debian will) distribute them.
> > (Note that Debian distributes libqt2.)
>
> Right - But not KDE - As this would contaminate the libqt2 in my
> understanding of Par. 9
Your understanding is flawed.
> The problem already stated in another
> mail the problem i had/have with Par.9 is that it doesnt contain
> a specification/definition under which relations a contamination
> would be legal/illegal.
It does. "Other software" is the key word. The GPL _NEVER_ _EVEN_
_CONSIDERS_ the license of Qt until such time as you try to combine it
with the GPL'd code. At that time the GPL says you may not do it with
THIS software covered by the GPL. Never does the GPL tell you that Qt
can't be licensed under Troll Tech's license. All it says is that IF you
wish to use Qt with the GPL'd program that Qt's license must be
compatible. It's not, so you can't.
This is not contamination of other software, it's contamination of the
GPL'd software. Whether or not this is acceptable to you is your business
but it does NOT fail the DFSG. This has been reiterated at least four
times to you in this thread. All you're doing is repeating yourself.
> I can accept the QT2/GPL fact without
> a problem but is is NOT a combined program - I see it as
> KDE including parts of QT2 and therefor requiring those parts
> of the QT2 to be under the GPL (symbol names, api definition etc).
> But noone else than the Copyright holder may limit or change
> the Distibution/License - Which means we (debian) may not
> distribute parts of the QT2 under the GPL which would KDE linked
> against QT2 would require.
Well you see there you have the problem in a nutshell. The people putting
out KDE have demanded as part of your license to distribute the software
an impossible set of conditions... What to do? Don't distribute KDE
binaries, as the license says not to do.
> But THIS relation (Linked Against) is not really clear from the Terms
> in Par.9 - It says "distributed along" which KDE + QT2 would also
> be.
Let me put this in very simple terms...
"This software is is under my arbitrary licence with these conditions
[...] Distribution of this software means you agree to my terms, and that
all software you distribute on the same CD is available to me under the
same terms."
That'd pretty easily fail the DFSG. The GPL doesn't say anything like
that however and doesn't fail the DFSG.
> IMHO the "distributed along" term does not clear the tightness/intense
> of the coupling (As none of the Programs debian distributes is unrelated
> to others - The relation COULD be the same medium)
You're NEVER going to find a wording which suits everyone.
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> GnuPG key 1024D/DCF9DAB3
Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org/) 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC
The QuakeForge Project (http://quakeforge.net/) 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
* Overfiend ponders doing an NMU of asclock, in which he simply changes
the extended description to "If you bend over and put your head between
your legs, you can read the time off your assclock."
<doogie> Overfiend: go to bed.
Reply to: