Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!cornell!rochester!ur-tut!ur-valhalla!galaxy.ee.rochester.edu!brown
From: brown@galaxy.ee.rochester.edu (Eric Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: GNU software rights (was Re: general class definitions)
Message-ID: <1403@valhalla.ee.rochester.edu>
Date: 3 Aug 88 18:14:36 GMT
References: <24158@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <800001@hpmtlx.HP.COM>
Sender: usenet@valhalla.ee.rochester.edu
Reply-To: brown@galaxy.ee.rochester.edu (Eric Brown)
Organization: UR Dept. of Electrical Engg, Rochester NY 14627
Lines: 17


In article <800001@hpmtlx.HP.COM> ed@hpmtlx.HP.COM ($Ed Schlotzhauer) writes:
>Likewise, making the source code of the g++ compiler freely sharable is a
>great idea, but making all code COMPILED with it necessarily sharable will
>seriously limit its acceptance.  For instance, I work for a commercial
>company and, despite how RMS feels about it, we do NOT give away everything
>we do.  I would like to use g++ for a few things, but I can't do any more
>than play with it as a toy because its use would compromise the ownership of
>what my company feels (right or wrong) is its property.
>
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think that code COMPILED with g++ or gcc is
required to be free.  Read the licence agreement again.  If you find where
it says the code I just developed must be free, PLEASE show me.

Thanks.
Eric Brown.
broe@tut.cc.rochester.edu