Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!AI.MIT.EDU!tower
From: tower@AI.MIT.EDU (Leonard H. Tower Jr.)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Copyleftability
Message-ID: <8912201116.AA03520@wheat-chex>
Date: 20 Dec 89 11:16:44 GMT
References: <970007@gore.com>
Sender: karl@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Reply-To: gnu-misc-discuss@cis.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: Project GNU, Free Software Foundation,
         675 Mass. Ave., Cambridge, MA  02139, USA   +1 (617) 876-3296
Lines: 67


   Date: 20 Dec 89 03:20:48 GMT
   From: gore!jacob@boulder.colorado.edu  (Jacob Gore)
   Organization: Gore Enterprises

   / gnu.misc.discuss / meo@stiatl.UUCP (Miles O'Neal) / Dec 19, 1989 /
   > the way I read [GNU GPL], it says if I write an original work that includes
   > copylefted code (such as gnu C runtime libraries), I can't sell it.
   > If I add to an existing thing, I can, but can't charge extra for anything
   > related to the copylefted stuff. So, that means a new work done with
   > GNU C would allow me only to charge for copying & distribution.

   > Did I misread something? I'd truly love to find out I did.

   1.  You can sell it as much as you want (and, as usual, find
   customers), as long as you follow the license.  The major
   limitations are:

       1.  You cannot deny your custromers the right to distribute it
       further (they, of course, must also obey the GNU GPL if they
       distribute it).

       2.   (cost to customer of distribution with source)
	  - (cost to customer of distribution without source)
	  --------------------------------------------------------
	  (no greater than a reasonable media, shipping & handling charge)

   So, it is wrong to say that you are forbidden to sell copylefted
   code, though you won't be able to sell it using the currently
   common approach ("pay me for each copy or I'll sick FBI on you, and
   pay 100 times as much if you want the source").

The parenthesized comment could be a little less emotional.  ;-}

   2.  Code compiled with the GNU C compiler does NOT become
   copylefted just because it was compiled with the GNU C compiler.
   That only happens if you link with GNU libraries.  Now, the GNU C++
   compiler, by default, links in code from GNU libraries, so unless
   you make your copy of g++ go after non-copylefted libraries, you
   will end up with copylefted code.

Well put.  Thanx for saving me the time of saying this (again for the
Nth time, for a very lage value of N ;-).

I *STRONGLY URGE* anyone who wishes to talk about the GNU Project to
carefully read the GNU Manifesto and GNU General Public License.  The
prose is clear, but some people have a lot of trouble understanding
it.  These people should re-read it *SLOWLY*, *CAREFULLY*, and without
the *PRE-CONCEPTIONS* that make it seem to say things it does not.

Then as a separate excercise, they should think about what it's real
effects are and how it really works in the world, instead of what
their *PRE-CONCEPTIONS* say its effects are.

   This is not the case with GNU C at all.

At this time.  I expect (guess not promise) that when the C libraries
are released GCC will use them by default, and non-GPLers will have to
go to extra effort to not use them.  It's not a goal of the GNU
Project to make life easy for non-GPLers.

I would like to re-iterate that use of the Bison parser generator has
the same effect as use of GNU Libraries.

   -- Jacob Gore	Jacob@Gore.Co		boulder!gore!jacob

thanx -len