Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!pt!dld From: dld@F.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (David Detlefs) Newsgroups: gnu.g++ Subject: Re: GNU Libraries and the GPL Message-ID: Date: 12 Jun 89 15:07:12 GMT References: <8906101209.AA04465@rocky> Distribution: gnu Organization: CMU CS Department Lines: 39 In-reply-to: dl@ROCKY.OSWEGO.EDU's message of 10 Jun 89 12:09:02 GMT Doug Lea posted recently explaining the rationale behind considering software that uses GNU libraries derivatives works of those libraries, subject the the GPL. His fairly persuasive argument, if I may summarize, is that if they were not, someone could take the source to Gnu-emacs (for example), make all but the .c file containing "main" into a library, rewrite "main," and sell it. Personally, I think the good of humanity would best be served if libg++ and other GNU libraries could be considered "tool-like", so that use of libg++ was equivalent to the use of g++, gcc, gnu-emacs, bison, etc. (I would be happy to discuss why I think this if a gnu.politics-equivalent ever materializes.) However, I must admit that Doug's is a fairly convincing argument. I am posting to suggest that there is a possible compromise position: what if the GPL were modified so that people creating proprietary works using GNU libraries were required to have customers sign a form saying something like: I realize that the software I am about to buy uses Free software. I have read the accompanying bulletin "Great Software You Can Get For Free!", and am aware of the 800 number I can call to discuss with Free Software experts whether the software I am about to buy is a significant innovation over something I can get for free. Perhaps the FSF could require a small fee be sent in by the seller for with each such charge form to defree the cost of the 800 number. Perhaps the FSF could distribute a list of software products that they would describe as "acceptably different" and another list of "blatent ripoffs" in the bulletin the release form encourages people to read. I realize that this is perhaps unwieldy, but it's an idea... -- Dave Detlefs Any correlation between my employer's opinion Carnegie-Mellon CS and my own is statistical rather than causal, dld@cs.cmu.edu except in those cases where I have helped to form my employer's opinion. (Null disclaimer.) --