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

Re: Strong Copyleft licenses other than the GNU GPL family.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> wrote:
> Le quartidi 14 brumaire, an CCXXIV, Mario Castelán Castro a écrit :
>> By strong Copyleft I mean a free software license that requires "derivate
>> works" (as determined by Copyright law) to be free software (as in freedom),
>> including works that are derivatives by making use of the Copylefted work
>> through an API.
> This kind of license, if it exists or if someone invents it, would have two
> serious drawbacks. That may explain why you do not find one.
> The firs drawback is that it would be incompatible with GPL code and
> libraries, and even possibly LGPL. That means libraries made using that
> license can not be used from GPL code or with GPL libraries. Basically,
> there is logically room for only one widely-adopted copyleft license.

I'm curious as to your reasoning here.

> The second drawback is that it would probably have no legal standing.
> Copyleft is based on copyright, and copyright controls distribution, nothing
> else. In principle, it can not control API use, since there is no
> distribution involved. In practice, you can argue that using an API requires
> copying tiny bits of it in the calling program: function names, macro
> expansion, etc. But this claim is weak: copyright requires originality, and
> there is little room for originality in function names; and it is easy to
> circumvent. The more restrictive you make your license, the stronger the
> incentive to circumvent it.

I'm not really seeing your reasoning here, either.

> Regards,
> --
>   Nicolas George

I would disagree (rather strongly) with at least some of what you seem
to be saying, but I'm not really sure what you are intending to say

Joel Rees

Be careful when you look at conspiracy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well:

Reply to: