Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL
Raul Miller wrote
> On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 05:37:51PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>> This is allowed by the GPL and required to be allowed by the DFSG, of
>> course, as long as the resulting gcc binary can be distributed under
>> the terms of the GPL. The GPL doesn't care what kinds of changes you
>> make (with very limited exceptions, such as the license blurb).
(Note: The license blurb is actually required to be maintained by copyright
law, not by the license itself.)
> Only if the resulting work (including the implementation of the support
> for those keywords) is distributable under the terms of the GPL.
No. The derived work is allowed no matter what:
GPL section 2:
GPL> You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of
GPL> it, thus forming a work based on the Program, [...], provided that
GPL> you also meet all of these conditions:
GPL> * a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
GPL> stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
There is no problem with your hypothetical "Paladium GCC" here.
GPL> * b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that
GPL> in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
GPL> part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
GPL> parties under the terms of this License.
Clause [b] ONLY applies to works distributed. If I never distribute your
hypothetical "Paladium GCC", then clause [b] is (vacuously) met.
GPL> * c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
GPL> when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive
GPL> use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement [...]
gcc does not normally print such an announcement, so your hypothetical
"Paladium GCC" would not have to.
All three requirements are met by your hypothetical "Paladium GCC" (as long
as it is not distributed). Thus, you have the permission granted in the
first two clauses of section 2.
> Or, if you're going for the OS exception, replace "integration with
> palladium" with "integration with foo" where there's no possibility
> that foo is an OS.
As long as the "works that you distribute or publish" do not have "any
further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted [by
the GPL]" (GPL Section 6), there is no problem.
If _YOU_ can not distribute or publish the work without restricting the
recipients' exercise of the rights, "then as a consequence you may not
distribute the Program at all" (GPL Section 7)
However, that says nothing about derivative works that are not distributed