Re: Down with the GPL!
DV Henkel-Wallace <[email protected]> Thu, 12 May 2005 15:55:30 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.misc.free-software-business |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 12 May 2005, at 15:43, Chris Maeda wrote: > I think this language makes perfect sense for a closed-source software > company. At the last 3 software companies I've worked for (1 > venture-funded > startup, 2 public companies), it was forbidden to incorporate GPL > software > into the product, but we used as much LGPL and Apache code as we could. For the product, sure. But in-house code (e.g. sysadmins) could reasonably benefit from GPL software and doing so would not leak mission-critical details. Likewise there are other libraries that are just as risky. E.g. ordering a copy of some royalty-bearing library out of the back of Dr Dobbs without management knowing. My problem is that it singled out GPL (and LGPL) code. I consider _that_ unreasonable. To me the GPLed code is just licensed code, no more no less. > -----Original Message----- > From: DV Henkel-Wallace [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 4:47 PM > To: Free Software for Business > Subject: Down with the GPL! > > I asked our law firm for their standard employee confidentiality and > assignment agreement for our company to use. They are a large, > well-respected form used by many many startups and big companies. > > It contained the following fascinating sentence: > > "I agree that I will not incorporate into any Company software > or otherwise deliver to Company any software code licensed > under the GNU GPL or LGPL or any other license that, by its > terms, requires or conditions the use or distribution of such > code on the disclosure, licensing, or distribution of any source > code owned or licensed by Company. " > > I had this changed this to say words to the effect that I (nor any the > other employee) would not incorporate third-party software that might > in any way affect our ability to redistribute (or not) any software > without permission of a company officer. Note that the latter > restricts the use of Visual C++, c# etc as well! > > I am astonished to find the text in a standard document. > > Grr. > > -g