Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Linux: how probable is it that it will be relevant in the near future?

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 16:47:59 11/11/98

Go up one level in this thread



On November 11, 1998 at 12:05:52, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On November 11, 1998 at 03:30:31, David Blackman wrote:
>[snip]
>>>  If you produce something with copyleft tools, it also is copyleft.
>>
>>This is not true. I suggest you actually read the GPL.
>Well, I can see that you are as arrogant as I am!  Only a great fool would make
>suc a statement as I did without having bothered to read the document.  I have
>enclosed a copy of it for you to peruse at your leisure.  This is the new
>version of GPL, which is supposed to remove the "Copyleft Virus" and yet clearly
>still fails to do so.

This is not the kind of language that leads to productive conversation, I think.

>IF YOUR PROGRAM IS DERIVED FROM GNU PROGRAMS IT IS COPYLEFT.  Section 0.:
>..."The ``Program'', below, refers to any such program or work, and a ``work
>based on the Program'' means either the Program or any derivative work under
>copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it,
>either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another language."

If the contention here is that anything created with a gnu compiler or other
tools must be free, I don't think this supports the contention.

If this were the case, gnu tools would be useless in any context involving
profit of any sort, which would seem to make them useless at work.

But, back to the compiler.  I think that the use of the term "derived" means
"based upon" or "created from", not "created with".  I think that the intent is
to keep people from selling the compiler, not from selling anything that is
compiled.

>YOU CAN'T CHARGE FOR IT: Section 2 "b. You must cause any work that you
>distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the
>Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>parties under the terms of this License."  See also 3. b & c, and Section 6.

This is interesting because I thought that it *was* alright to sell a copyleft
product as long as you included source code and told people they could give it
away.

This sounds like a goofy thing to do, but you can *buy* gnuchess and the like on
disk for a few bucks in off-beat places like music stores sometimes.

So I wonder what the deal is with this.

bruce



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.