Xref: utzoo alt.religion.computers:1369 gnu.misc.discuss:740 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!image.soe.clarkson.edu!news From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: Disinfecting the GNU Public Virus...er...License Message-ID: Date: 18 Jan 90 21:55:56 GMT References: <4&VSZ:@splut.conmicro.com> Sender: news@sun.soe.clarkson.edu Reply-To: nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY Lines: 19 In-reply-to: sja@sirius.hut.fi's message of 17 Jan 90 12:24:17 GMT In article sja@sirius.hut.fi (Sakari Jalovaara) writes: > I suggest that you come up with an example of someone who unintentionally > "infected" his code. I started writing a FORTRAN (blecch) front-end for gcc before I read the license. I thought I could make my own work public domain. I didn't get to the stage of actually giving the compiler to anyone, though; it wasn't anywhere near ready, it only compiled some simple benchmarks. I rm'd the thing when I found out that someone else was going to dictate what I could do with my work. That's utter nonsense. You could put your work in the public domain, and anyone could link it to any gcc-compatible back end. Since there *is* only one, your work is effectively covered by the copyleft. -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667 Violence never solves problems, it just changes them into more subtle problems