Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!aber-cs!pcg
From: pcg@aber-cs.UUCP (Piercarlo Grandi)
Newsgroups: gnu.gcc
Subject: Re: If the user does the link
Summary: NeXT uses copylefted source, in a proprietary environment.
Message-ID: <1011@aber-cs.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jun 89 12:57:14 GMT
Reply-To: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
Distribution: gnu
Organization: Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth
	(Disclaimer: my statements are purely personal)
Lines: 45

In article <26713@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> brooks@maddog.llnl.gov (Eugene Brooks) writes:
    In article <999@aber-cs.UUCP> pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
    >
    >Finally, a proof of existence for those that still have doubts: NeXT.
    When NeXT distributes their NeXT Step code as copylefted source I will
    eat my hat!

Context:

All this discussion started because some (greedy) people pointed out that
they were prevented by the GPL *conditions* (none of them is a *restriction*,
let me insist) from selling code compiled with FSF sw. RMS has many times
pointed out that this is not true; only if they want to incorporate FSF code
(e.g. the non essential libraries, the essential ones have been put in the PD
by the FSF) in their products the GPL applies.

Discussion:

NeXT is living proof that you can *use* FSF sw to develop proprietary products.
NeXT Step code was developed with gcc, gdb, gemacs, etc..., and has been sold
for $10,000,000 to IBM after all.

    I have also heard that NeXT is exploiting the user does the link trick,
    sounds like software hoarder to me.

Inasmuch their sw is not freely redistributable in source code, they are
"hoarders" by definition, whether they use proprietary or free sw to develop
it. The link trick is legitimate, after all. The GPL condition that any sw
incorporating free sw *and distributed to third parties* must be free as well
is designed, as RMS has said many times, only to *encourage* users of free sw
to make their sw free as well, by making it more trouble to distribute
proprietary sw using free one.

    Is RMS going to boycott them for this???

As far as I understand him, RMS is disappointed when "hoarders" take
advantage of free sw to develop proprietary sw, but consistently with his
principles he does not want to restrict free sw only to "sharers". Also, he
has repeatedly said that the FSF are too busy/poor to get annoyed at all
those that do something they don't like; the perpetrators of potential
industry wide disasters like Apple are another matter though.
-- 
Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi           | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth        | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg
Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk