Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL
Scripsit Raul Miller <email@example.com>
> Let's add some patents and maybe some special government legislation
> or treaties to the mix, for example -- such that you have a proprietary
> function which can be distributed under some license terms which involve
> money changing hands, but cannot be distributed under GPL license terms.
> How is it not the GPL which is preventing this distribution?
It is the patents, the government legislation, et cetera, that
prevents the distribution.
I really don't see how you can claim that it is the GPL that leads to
non-distributability . Could you try to describe the reasoning that
leads you to that conclusion (rather than just asserting that is is)?
> If so, how is this different from any other case of "not being able to
> distribute under the terms of some license"?
It is different from, for example, a license that explicitly says:
Modified versions that run under X11 are not allowed and may not be
(By the way, this example is not hypothetical - as far as I remember,
we once saw such a license on d-l. I don't remember when or for which
Henning Makholm "What a hideous colour khaki is."