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

Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL

Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:

>> > Let's go for emacs and openssl.  If there is no distribution of
>> > emacs+openssl, then there is no problem.  Are you asserting that this
>> > is the case?
> On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 08:07:39PM -0400, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
>> Yes.  I am asserting that I can combine OpenSSL and Emacs code to
>> produce an arbitrary functional result, except that I may not remove
>> Emacs' interactive startup notice unless I also remove its
>> interactivity.
> If you do this as an original creative work, and keep that work to
> yourself, then you are probably fine in the U.S.  I don't know about
> other countries.
> However, anything more than that and to my knowledge you don't have a
> license for that.

But I've explained several times that the OpenSSL and GNU General
Public licenses both give me permission to make modifications,
following certain small restrictions -- and while those restrictions
include that I maintain copyright notices, that would look something
like this:

"Portions copyright (c) Free Software Foundation 1984-2004.
 Portions copyright (c) Tatu Ylonen, Eric Young, and the OpenSSL team 1992-2004."

Those restrictions include nothing about licensing requirements, and
you've never cited a portion of the GPL which imposes licensing
requirements on undistributed works.

Please do so, quoting this message in its entirety and replying inline.

> In particular, if your contribution to this work isn't original (if you
> don't hold copyright on this work), then I claim you are breaking the law.
> Or, if it is original and you're creating [publishing] many copies then
> you are probably still breaking the law -- either because you've not
> kept intact the notices of license or because you are violating one of
> those licenses.

Creating many copies is not equivalent to Publishing.  If I create
many copies and store them in my basement, I am not a publisher and I
am distributing nothing.  The GPL's provisions which restrict the
licenses under which new copies may be distributed do not apply to
copies which are not distributed, only made and kept privately.


Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu

Reply to: