On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 12:04:59PM +0200, Stefan Schwandter wrote: > > In other words, if GPL'ed app A links against OpenSSL and GNU readline, > > you need permission from both the copyright holder of "A" and from the > > Free Software Foundation to link with OpenSSL. > > Ok. But how has this permission to look like? Is a paragraph in the > upstreams package's COPYING file, in which is stated that permission to > link to OpenSSL is granted, sufficient? Well, it can take many forms, as long as the permission is clearly granted. I haven't yet seen an exception that I would consider "best-of-breed". The CUPS license is excellent in many respects but I think their OpenSSL exception may be a little too generous and leave open some sort of loophole that could lead to exploitation to the software so licensed. I don't think this is necessarily a threat to CUPS itself, but it might be to some project that copies their exception clauses. -- G. Branden Robinson | If God had intended for man to go Debian GNU/Linux | about naked, we would have been branden@debian.org | born that way. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpJnkcuIzJca.pgp
Description: PGP signature