Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bionet!ames!vsi1!wyse!td2cad!mipos3!tpriddy@homrun.intel.com
From: tpriddy@homrun.intel.com (Tim Priddy ~)
Newsgroups: gnu.gcc
Subject: Re: (none)
Message-ID: <238@mipos3.intel.com>
Date: 10 Jun 89 03:44:46 GMT
References: <8906082043.AA00523@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu>
Sender: news@mipos3.intel.com
Reply-To: tpriddy@homrun.intel.com (Tim Priddy ~)
Distribution: gnu
Organization: INTeL Santa Clara Microcomputer Division
Lines: 29
In-reply-to: rms@AI.MIT.EDU

Mr. Stallman,

	I really like *your* software (that of FSF).  A lot of things 
have been said in gnu.gcc about your intent, the intent of FSF and 
"Copyleft".  It has left me wondering:

	Is it your intent that software I compile with gcc and it's 
straight-off-the-net libraries, not be able to be sold?  Similarly 
could that software at least be kept private?

	It has always been my understanding that Copyleft's intent 
(and legal meaning) was to perpetuate the free distribution the 
specific gnu software (emacs, gcc, bison, etc).  Is this your under-
standing as well?

	I will now proceed to be so bold as to do what I've just
complained of and put words in your mouth.  

	I believe that your intent is to write good software, freely 
	available to everybody (even if they work for Apple), with the 
	assurance that your work never be hoarded by anyone (not even 
	yourself).  

	If this is not correct would you please state your intent and
understanding of copyleft in similarly plain language?

	Tim Priddy (Oakland Coliseum, Sec: 123, row: 3, seat: 13)
	internet: tpriddy@homrun.intel.com   
	uucp:     ...!{decwrl|hplabs!oliveb}!intelca!mipos3!tpriddy