[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Everaldo keeping kde in lock -- was: K-ARTIST: Icons,
From:       Andreas Pour <pour () mieterra ! com>
Date:       2004-01-15 23:16:49
Message-ID: 40071F61.14B569CC () mieterra ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> 
> On Thursday 15 January 2004 19:27, Andreas Pour wrote:
> >
> > The same would be true if I wrote a KDE program and released the
> > binary under the GPL.  I would be under no obligation to release the
> > source under the GPL.
> 
> Wouldn't that be in violation of section 3 of the GPL? It clearly says
> that the source code has to be made available for an executable
> distributed under the GPL.

That part is admittedly ambiguous but to me Section 3 signals a transformation
(i.e. it refers to a derived work in executable or object code form).  It
contemplates the source code, which you received under the GPL, being converted
to object code or executable form.

If you do not read it this way, think about the situation where part of the
program (such as the kernel or some math or codec function) is written in
assembler (object code form).  In that case this assembly language code is the
"Program" and Section 3 does not apply to it (but Section 2 of course does). 
The way I read it, what was originally shipped under the GPL is shipped under
the GPL, and I do not think you have to go any higher on the development /
transformation chain than that.

The GPL was designed for high-level computer programming language code and when
you apply it to other things - like binary code - it gets even more ambiguous /
wierd than it already is :-).

Ciao,

Dre
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]