Re: GMail is using Hspell!

Hi yba,

The philosophical question is not about Free Software, but about Copyleft. 
However, it is real.

Shai.

On Sunday, March 12 2006 09:20, Jonathan Ben Avraham wrote:
> Hi Nadav,
> See inlilne comment below.
>
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2006, Diego Iastrubni wrote about "Re: GMail is using 
Hspell!":
> >> Nadav, HSpell is GPL V2. Let me quote from that license:
> >> ..
> >> As much as I can understand (IANAL), this means that there is no
> >> restriction (at all) on how do you use the application. Google are using
> >> hspell internally, and they are not even distributing it (only it's
> >> output). This is perfectly in no contradiction to the GPL.
> >
> > I know. I never said I blaim Google for doing anything illegal. In fact,
> > I even mailed them several times over the last year *asking* them to use
> > Hspell, and even discussed this idea with a Google executive. As I said,
> > the fact they used Hspell is flattering, and many of my family members
> > actually use GMail, I also have a reason to want to see its Hebrew
> > support improving.
> >
> > I just raised a philosophical question (which is perhaps more
> > appropriately discussed at discussions@hamakor, not on this list),
> > whether the GPL's focus on "distribution" of code, which was the "old"
> > way software was used (a.k.a. proprietary software) is missing a very big
> > change in Today's software world, where software is used to provide a
> > service, and the software is hidden (and can even be called "internal")
> > while only the service is public. I'm not even sure what I think about
> > this issue - like I said - I was not against Google using Hspell and I
> > even asked them to do so. But I'm starting to wonder where the line
> > should be drawn: I'm quite pleased that Google uses Hspell in a service
> > it provides for free, but what if this was a paid service? And will I be
> > as pleased if Microsoft creates its first paid "service" version of
> > Microsoft Word and uses Hspell for its spell-checker?
>
> Microsoft's use of Hspell in this case could be entirely within the spirit
> of the GPL. There is no philosophical question to be asked or answered.
> People who think that there is some link between not charging for a
> service and Free Software (as defined by the FSF) are sorely mistaken. I
> say "sorely" because the both Richard Stallman and the FSF have stated
> many times that they are not against charging for software or services
> based on software - as written in the GPL. Furthermore, the GPL is not
> outdated and is not missing anything regarding providing the use of
> software as a service whether for a fee or not.
>
> The "philosphical" discussion now has gone a step beyond the original
> intent of the FSF. The discussion is in fact about how to create legal
> barriers to charging money for either software or it's use in any form,
> not about software freedom. This is a step backwards, since the freedom to
> charge for software and its use is enshrined in the GPL.
>
>   - yba
>
> > I don't know. I think that I and most other free software writers haven't
> > given this enough thought. We used to have to decide between BSD and GPL
> > licenses, but now we have a third option: to disallow non-free "services"
> > as well (if I understand correctly, the GPL 3 is going in the direction
> > of this third option).
> >
> >> Again, my humble opinion:
> >> GPL3 - niet
> >> Google - niet
> >> HSpell - DA!
> >> niet, niet dah!
> >>
> > :-)
> >>
> >> btw,
> >> you talked about "decoy" words. Can you elaborate about that?
> >
> > Well, this is a trick that many creators of lists (word lists, phone
> > number list, address lists, and so on) use to catch unauthorized use of
> > their lists. The idea is that you add to the list one or more items which
> > are wrong (in our case, not a real Hebrew word); These items have to be
> > real- looking (so that the "bad guys" will not be able to recognize and
> > remove them without a lot of work) but on the other hand, they should be
> > far enough from real items so that the "bad guys" cannot claim that it
> > appeared on their list by chance, independently of the original list, and
> > that they don't damage innocent users.
> >
> > The software equivalent of these decoys is "Easter Eggs" - see for
> > example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_egg_%28virtual%29
----
Ivrix-discuss list. See http://ivrix.org.il.
To unsubscribe, please send mail to [email protected] with
only the following line in the message body (NOT SUBJECT!): unsubscribe