Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!blackbush.xlink.net!ka.sub.net!gummo.bbb.sub.org!gummo.bbb.sub.org!not-for-mail
From: bertram@gummo.bbb.sub.org (Bertram Barth)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc
Subject: Re: Linux vs whatever
Date: 9 Feb 1997 16:06:15 +0100
Organization: private site in Bruchsal, Germany
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <5dkp57$553@gummo.bbb.sub.org>
References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5claa2$jq1@cynic.portal.ca> <5dask0$13q0@usenet1y.prodigy.net> <5dfnn2$b3g@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gummo.bbb.sub.org
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:158027 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:5986
>(snip)
>>| > Anyone is free to reimplement it as a non-GPLed piece
>>| > of code, should they be perverse enough to want to try.
>>|
>>| As a matter of fact, that has been done. In NetBSD we now have a
>>| non-GPL'd zlib, and we're writing front ends for it so we can get
>>| rid of gzip and gunzip and the like.
>>
>> That really sounds dumb. GPL doesn't say you have to give away the
>> operating system if you include gzip, why would you write another
>> program to do the same thing?
>>|
>It also is impossible. Let's say you write or port a GPL program to
>MS-DOS. Certainly, you can't be expected to give away MS-DOS.
>
>Either I have a serious misunderstanding of law or someone else does.
The problem is not in adding a complete GPL'ed program but in using parts
of its GPL'ed sources within another program.
Assume MS wants to add a new feature to command.com which is the ability
to load and execute gzipped binaries. If they just integrate the relevant
source lines of gzip into their sources, then their complete(!) sources
(for command.com) become GPL'ed. At least this is my understanding.
The above example might look silly and for different reasons this will
never happen. But for more realistic examples, let's assume NetBSD wants
to add support for loading gzipped kernels and/or support for executing
gzipped binaries into the kernel. For them it's just impossible to
extract the relevant lines from the GPL'ed gzip-sources into their
boot-program and kernel! Thus they need(!) to rewrite this stuff...
BTW: I don't know for sure, thus I'm assuming that the gzip-sources
are GPL'ed and that there exists no LGPL'ed library. Anyhow,
who could decide to put some of the gzip routines into a library
and downgrade from GPL to LGPL? The original author? the FSF?
Ciao,
bertram
PS: one last question: Let's assume Author A wrote a program and made
it available under the GPL. Now many different contributors added
bug-fixes and enhancements (still under GPL). Is the original
author still allowed to change the copyright (to LGPL or something
else)? Does he "own" only the first version or also the improved
versions? Or is only the group of all contributors able to do that?
--
home: bertram@gummo.bbb.sub.org work: bertram@ifib.uni-karlsruhe.de
- Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately described by stupidity -