Re: DFSG Par. 9 and GPL "Virulogical" effekt
On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 07:00:23PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 06:21:48PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> > 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)
>
> Yes. You are right this can be confusing. Maybe the term should say
> something like:
>
> The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed
> along with the licensed software but are independent and separate works.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is IMHO the important thing.
> The license may not place any restrictions on any distribution that is a mere
> aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That would be also ok ...
> But then again the DFSG is not a strict license but only a guideline.
> And it is very difficult to pinpoint how tight the coupling between pieces of
> source code/software is or when something is a derivative work of something
> else. Debian should always act in the spirit and not the letter of Free
> Software Licenses.
Right - The whole GPL vs. Par. 9 issue was a thought i had when reading
the DFSG - And immediatly i saw space for misinterpretation and when
used "wrong", as a case against the GPL.
Flo
--
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: