Re: GPL Mere Aggregation question

[avesty]

On Dec 28, 4:37 am, "Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org> wrote:
>    Just after some straight answers... The company selling a
>    commercial license to the GPL software is obviously motivated to
>    sell me one, as opposed to help clarify the GPL.
>
> What do you mean with a commercial license?

They have release the software under two licenses - the GPL and what
they call a commercial license. The commercial license lets you bundle/
resell etc however you please. The GPL license supposedly lets you do
everything the GPL lets you do. The reason there's a problem is what
they're telling me is Ok and what the GPL seems to tell me are ok are
two different things.

>    It seems quite difficult to get straight answers on what exactly
>    is/isn't ok with the GPL...
>
> Try reading the license, it is very clear even for non-lawyer people.

I disagree. There are plenty of spots in the GPL that way too open to
interpration, which seems to be exactly the problem here. I and the
FAQ interpret it one way, the company interprets it another.

Don't get me wrong... I'm not trying to bend any rules or get access
to anything I shouldn't have access to here. This company chose to
release their software under the GPL. I'd love to be able to make use
of the GPL license to their software, I just want to make sure that
I'm abiding by the GPL.  Ultimately it's the companies interpretation
of the GPL that I will abide by, it's their software after all, it
would just make sense to me that if a company releases something under
the GPL that it would result in some fairly clear cut criteria on what
can/can't be done with the software.