On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 23:51:03 +0000 John Halton wrote: > On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 07:11:32PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 16:05:53 +0000 John Halton wrote: > > > One problem with the HPL is that it is a modification of the GPL, > > > which is prohibited by the GPL itself. > > > > This is not really the case. > > As long as you change the license name (which was done by HPL > > authors), drop the preamble (which was done, as well), and modify > > the instructions-for-use accordingly (which was more or less done by > > HPL authors[1]), you have permission from the FSF to create a > > derivative license from the GNU GPL. > > See http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL > > I stand corrected. Thanks for the link. You are welcome! :) > I note though that the same > FAQ goes on to say: > > "Although we will not raise legal objections to your making a modified > license in this way, we hope you will think twice and not do it. Such > a modified license is almost certainly incompatible with the GNU GPL, > and that incompatibility blocks useful combinations of modules. *The > mere proliferation of different free software licenses is a burden in > and of itself*." Yeah, and then the FSF goes on to publish (or seek to publish): * the GNU FDL [1] * the GNU AfferoGPL * the GNU SFDL [2] * the GNU Wiki License, mentioned in a GFDLv2-draft1 proposed clause[3] [1] http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/readsay.html?filename=gplv3-draft-3&id=2259 [2] http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/summarydecision.html?filename=%3C%%20%20%%3E&id=2287 [3] http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/rt/readsay.html?filename=gplv3-draft-3&id=2285 I think the FSF should read more what they themselves write in their own FAQs... :-( > > I think that is a good reason for holding off from seeking other > solutions to the "ASP problem" (assuming we are clear as to whether > there _is_ a problem, which is a different argument) until the AGPL > discussions have finalised. I'm not convinced that there actually is a problem. But anyway, I'm under the impression that it could be impossible to address this "problem" without doing more harm than good. Any "solution" I've seen so far is either utterly non-free, or non-free in subtler ways. Disclaimers, as usual: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP. -- http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpA81wS2eg1Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature