Re: The draft Position statement on the GFDL
> >That's specific to that jurisdiction, not a part of a license.
On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:11:20PM -0300, Humberto Massa wrote:
> I said it in other post: Brazilian law is modelled closed on the Berne
> convention; possibly other jurisdictions have similar dispositions.
And to some degree, any jurisdiction must have some provisions for
implicitly approved copies, or it's not meaningful to distribute
contemporary proprietary copyrighted computer programs.
But some people have made claims that there are certain things we require
of the license (such as the complete absence of restrictions on the
right to create derivative works), regardless of the law.
> >Alternatively, how are you combining gcc and metafont without making a
> >copy of the software which combines gcc and metafont?
> Why would you want to do that?
Perhaps I'm building a just-in-time compiler for some rendering
environment.
> Let's see, step-by-step:
> 1. I get gcc's sources;
> 1. (a) I have a valid license to it;
> 2. I get metafont sources;
> 2. (a) I also have a valid license to this;
> -- up to this point, no license violation
> 3. I make modifications to gcc and to metafont, taking care of :
> 3. (a) not removing any copyright (C) notices -- they are already there,
> I don't need to put them, I received gcc under the terms of the GPL,
> with the notices, and the disclaimer (as to satisfy GPL#1);
> 3. (b) marking the changed files as changed as to satisfy GPL#2, 'a';
Here's where you start running into problems: GPL#2 requires you satisfy
GPL#1 for the modified work, which now includes stuff you do not have
the right to put under GPL's terms.
The subsequent steps you've proposed do not rectify this issue.
Alternatively you've not yet created a work combining both, but when
you do reach that point you'll still have this issue:
...
> 4. I will write my files needed to integrate both, taking all the
> necessary precautions 3 a-d above. Notice that probably my files (unless
> completely unrelated) are derived works both of metafont and of gcc.
> -- no license violation.
What are the appropriate license notices you've placed? How do they
satisfy the GPL requirements about the license on the work as a whole?
And then there's the copies you would need to make for test and debug
purposes...
Of course, if this is done in a jurisdiction where copyright isn't
required for these copies then there is no issue. Also, until the
author(s) of gcc do not care to act on this case then you are not going
to be subject to penalties for infringement. But that's not because
the GPL has granted copyright for this case.
--
Raul
Reply to: