Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL

[Brian Thomas Sniffen <bts@alum.mit.edu>]

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

-- 
Brian Sniffen                                       bts@alum.mit.edu