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

Re: Bug#181493: SUN RPC code is DFSG-free

On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 02:56:33PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 12:09:43PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > > our users and the DFSG are equally important), and the code is (at
> > > > least) not GPL-incompatible (you should read the first paragraph after
> > > > section 2c of the GPL if you disagree).
> > > 
> > > You've tried to make that argument before; go dig in the archives for
> > > the reasons why it's wrong.
> > 
> > Actually, I haven't done such a thing.
> Oh, that was Steve Langasek. Anyway, the answer is in that same
> paragraph; it only applies "unless that component itself accompanies
> the executable" - clearly irrelevant to us.

No, you're referring to section 3. I'm referring to section 2,

  These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If
  identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
  and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
  themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
  sections when you distribute them as separate works.  But when you
  distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
  on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
  this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
  entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote

> Plus section 2 isn't the issue anyway, it's section 6 that makes it
> incompatible.

I don't think section 6 can make it incompatible. For reference:

  6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
  Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
  original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
  these terms and conditions.  You may not impose any further
  restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
  You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
  this License.

The RPC code is not based on glibc; rather, glibc is based in part on
the RPC code. Section 6 only applies to "the Program", or "any work
based on the Program". The combined work of both the glibc and the RPC
code is clearly affected by section 6 of the GPL, and since the RPC code
is supposed to be MIT/X11 when part of a whole, it is not incompatible;
however, the RPC code *by itself* is not, nor can it be.

Of course, usual IANAL rules apply.

In any case, it's clear that there is no consensus on this subject yet.
My point -- that holding up the release for this problem, which it well
may be, is not a good idea -- still stands.

Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation."
"So is my neck, stop it anyway!"
  -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.

Attachment: pgpwSIICzBdgx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: