RE: License question

[David Schwartz]

> Hi. Go do your homework. Check the URLs I gave you. The list of 
> GPL-compatible licenses include licenses with the exact same 
> "restrictions", namely the Modified BSD license. The URL is from GNU 
> official page, so it is official that such licenses are accepted.

	It is official that the FSF accepts them. This does not mean that a court will. If I place my program under the GPL, I am the one who would sue you. A court would not particularly care what the FSF thinks the GPL means, they would care what the GPL actually says and what I mean when I placed my program under it.

	The plain language of the GPL does not permit a requirement that you maintain a list of licensing terms other than the GPL. This license requires you to do just that.
 
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
> 
> I quote the text from there. It is a close match to the license in 
> question, and has the same "restrictions" you are disputing.
> 
> 
> Text from www.gnu.org:
> =====
> The modified BSD license. http://www.xfree86.org/3.3.6/COPYRIGHT2.html#5
> (Note: on the preceding link, the modified BSD license is listed in the 
> "General" section.)
> 
> This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising 
> clause. It is a simple,
> permissive non-copyleft free software license, compatible with 
> the GNU GPL.

	I agree with everything but the last part. The GPL does not permit you to require anyone to maintain any licensing language other than the GPL itself but his license does. That makes them incompatible.
 

> 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, 
> this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

	The problem is the "this list of conditions". Please show me where the GPL permits you to have a list of restrictions (other than the GPL itself) that people are prohibited from removing when they distribute the work.

> 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright 
> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the 
> documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

	Again, please show me the GPL section that permits this restriction. I see no GPL section that permits you to prevent people from removing a "list of conditions" when they distribute a work.

> There. Now stop arguing.

	I'm right. The FSF, and you, are wrong. If you are correct, quote the GPL section that permits you to prohibit people from removing a list of conditions for copying/distributing.

	DS


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/