Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!bbn!bbn.com!jgrace From: jgrace@bbn.com (Joe Grace) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: libg++ and copylefts Message-ID: <43105@bbn.COM> Date: 21 Jul 89 20:43:45 GMT References: <799@redsox.bsw.com> <6590194@hplsla.HP.COM> <318@gt-eedsp.gatech.edu> <2053@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <42888@bbn.COM> <441@cimshop.UUCP> Sender: news@bbn.COM Reply-To: jgrace@porter-square.BBN.COM (Joe Grace) Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA Lines: 34 In article <441@cimshop.UUCP> davidm@cimshop.UUCP (David Masterson) writes: >In message <42888@bbn.com>, jgrace@bbn.com writes: >>The key is to avoid having the code or its successive versions become >>copyrighted, copylefted, or otherwise hoarded by any institution or >>foundation. >> >Isn't this a copyleft? I think Jim Adcock recently (in 2 different articles) explained the problems better than I did. Anyway, copyleft restricts the use of its software. The "copycorrect" I suggested was meant to make software reusable for free. >No really, by your definition, someone still can't use >libg++ because its *public domain* and using it in a copyrighted work would >take it out of the public domain. > >David Masterson >uunet!cimshop!davidm or DMasterson@cup.portal.com libg++ is not public domain, it is copylefted (does that really mean it's copyrighted with a copyleft?). Companies can't afford to use it because it requires the copyleft'ing of libg++-unrelated source code. Kind of like adding a book to a library of your personal works, and losing exclusive rights to your own books! It kind of turns my stomach to think about such an unfair licensing agreement, especially when toted as "free" software. = Joe = Joe Grace ARPA: jgrace@bbn.com UUCP: {harvard,husc6,decvax,etc.}!bbn!jgrace #include