[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ROFL] GCC's GPLv3 "Updated License Exception"

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: [ROFL] GCC's GPLv3 "Updated License Exception"
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:03:47 +0100

David Kastrup wrote:
> Doesn't matter as long as it is no judge rolling with laughter.  Once it
> is, there is case law against plugin copyright creep, and nobody will be
> more happy about that than the FSF. 

"plugin copyright creep"


"RMS: ... To be using three years old software is not a disaster.

AM3: Don't you think this is a system that would favour feature creep?

RMS: [airily] Ah that's OK. That's a minor side issue, compared with
these issues of freedom encouraging, every system encourages some
artificial distortions in what people, and our present system certainly
encourages various kinds of artificial distortions in activity that is
covered by copyright so if a changed system also encourages a few of
these secondary distortions it's not a big deal I would say.

AM4: The problem with this change in the copyright laws for three would
be that you wouldn't get the sources.

RMS: Right. There would have also to be a condition, a law that to sell
copies of the software to the public the source code must be deposited
somewhere so that three years later it can be released. So it could be
deposited say, with the library of congress in the US, and I think other
countries have similar institutions where copies of published books get
placed, and they could also received the source code and after three
years, publish it. And of course, if the source code didn't correspond
to the executable that would be fraud, and in fact if it really
corresponds then they ought to be able to check that very easily when
the work is published initially so you're publishing the source code and
somebody there says alright “dot slash configure dot slash make” and
sees if produces the same executables and uh.

So you're right, just eliminating copyright would not make software

AM5: Um libre

RMS: Right. That's the only sense I use the term. ..."


> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]