Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian

[mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)]

bts@alum.mit.edu (Brian T. Sniffen) writes:

>>>> I don't know the details of who writes the SSL support for Konq or how
>>>> it's done, nor do I have any machines with Konqueror on them in front
>>>> of me right now, so I can't comment on that.
>>>
>>> Ah, found it -- Debian KDE list, late July 2002: Konqueror doesn't
>>> link against OpenSSL.  It runs a separate process (kcm_crypto, it
>>> looks like), which links against openssl... but does so in a way that
>>> *doesn't* invoke OpenSSL's advertising clause.  Thus, the GPL
>>> prohibition on additional restrictions isn't invoked, and what KDE's
>>> doing is fine.
>>
>> And *that* wasn't done just to get around the legalities?
>
> Oh, sure it was -- but to get around the legality of obnoxiously
> having to advertise for others, as opposed to the legality of sharing
> and sharing alike.  If Eric Young advertised all OpenSSL-using
> software I'd be a lot more tolerant of its license.

I see, it's OK to do tricks to get around things you find obnoxious,
but not others?  I see nothing wrong with wanting credit for your
work.

If my plugin forks and execs openssl, would it be OK then?  I could do
it that way.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se