Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!shelby!agate!eris.berkeley.edu!doug
From: doug@eris.berkeley.edu (Doug Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.dsp
Subject: Re: Looking for a PD 56000 assembler
Keywords: GNU, gas, 56k, PD
Message-ID: <1991Feb1.232018.11616@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 1 Feb 91 23:20:18 GMT
References: <1407@disuns2.epfl.ch>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 21

In article <1407@disuns2.epfl.ch> pulfer@lamisun3.epfl.ch (PULFER Jean-Michel) writes:
>
>status for selling gnu-* produced code in an embedded system that has
>not much display for a copyright and/or warranty notice ?

If you mean non-Gnu code compiled with a Gnu compiler, the consensus
of opinion seems to be that such compiled non-Gnu code belongs to you,
not to the Gnu FSF. Since there's often differences of opinion on legal
issues, I'll further point out that a large number of companies (the one I
work for included) compile the software we develop and sell with GNU cc/g++
without fear that their/our vast investment will suddenly belong to the FSF.

I suspect that if the FSF took someone to court and tried to claim
that the non-Gnu software belonged to the FSF simply because it
was compiled with Gnu tools, then the court would very likely regard
that as unfair restraint of trade, regardless of interpretation of
fine print. That's just my personal opinion, of course.
	Doug
--
	Doug Merritt		doug@eris.berkeley.edu (ucbvax!eris!doug)
			or	uunet.uu.net!crossck!dougm