Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!uunet!ginosko!eyebeam!jbw
From: jbw@eyebeam.UUCP (Jeremy B. Wohlblatt)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Query: Status of Mach cleanout?
Message-ID: <2962@ginosko.samsung.com>
Date: 23 Aug 89 14:40:11 GMT
References: <12720001@eecs.nwu.edu> <1311000001@upba> <774@mipos3.intel.com>
Sender: news@ginosko.samsung.com
Lines: 25

nate@hobbes.intel.com (Nate Hess) writes:
>In article <1311000001@upba>, damon@upba writes:
>>I hope they finish soon also.  A freely distributable kernel is a much
>>desired thing.  However, I am wondering about what restrictions FSF will
>>place on it.  I can just see the ideologues puting a copyleft on it
>>requiring any program run on the OS to be freely distributable.

>I sincerely doubt that the FSF will do this; in fact, I don't think they
>would be able to do it, just like they can't require that all files
>edited with GNU Emacs be under the terms of the copyleft.

i think f.s.f. legally could do this.  those who sell binaries often prevent
you from disassembling; there are many restrictions on use that the owner
could place on a product when distributing it, and even restricting use of
documents edited with gnuemacs would probably be legal.

it would, however, be manifestly stupid to do so.  very few people outside
outside f.s.f. and academia would use a product that has virtually no role
in a commercial environment.

					-- jeremy
these opinions might not be those of my employer.  they might not even be mine.
jeremy b. wohlblatt: samsung software america, inc.
	uucp: {decvax!{gsg,cg-atla},uunet,ulowell}!ginosko!jbw
	internet:	jbw@ginosko.samsung.com