Re: Plea for a reasonable RHASv3 license option

Le dim 31/08/2003 à 23:45, [email protected] a écrit :
> On 31 Aug 2003, Féliciano Matias wrote:
> 
> > 
> > For me, this is clearly violating GPL.
> > A GPL/BSD program, in binary or source form, can be freely (as in beer
> > and speech) used. I can copy it to another machine and use it.
> 
> I believe the only GPL requirement that RedHat must comply 
> with is to provide source code on request.  I have seen nothing in the GPL 
> which states binaries created from GPL source cannot be restricted in use, 
> so long as source is provided on request.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
------------------------------------------------
0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a
notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under
the terms of this General Public License. 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.
(Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in the term
"modification".)
------------------------------------------------

GPL applies to "translated into another language" (source to binary).

Are you saying that a GPL library in binary form is not GPL ?

RedHat have removed MySQL 4 from rawhide (and RHLP) because
libmysqlclient is now a GPL library (LGPL in MySQL 3).
So, php can't not be linked to libmysqlclient V4 :

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
-------------------------------------------------
The PHP License, Version 3.0.
        This license is used by most of PHP4. It is a non-copyleft free
        software license which is incompatible with the GNU GPL. 

        We recommend that you not use this license for anything except
        PHP add-ons.


The Zend License, Version 2.0.
        This license is used by one part of PHP4. It is a non-copyleft
        free software license which is incompatible with the GNU GPL,
        and has practical problems like those of the original BSD
        license.
-------------------------------------------------


And what about programs that don't have a binary form ?

> Whether this act is moral is 
> totally a different question, whether the authors of the GPL intended this 
> use I do not know, but my reading of the GPL suggests RedHat has the 
> "legal" right to do this.
> 

I am not really sure.

-- 
Féliciano Matias <[email protected]>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/UnqvAlHlXNHHbFMRAs1WAKC102M3dfT5Rs0+XzVc789VwRJsAwCeI5xM
/KSoiISm2jsmoiUvY69WGR0=
=2f87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----