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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: [knghtbrd@debian.org: QPL v0.92+knghtbrd1]
From:       Andreas Pour <pour () mieterra ! com>
Date:       1998-12-29 23:33:18
[Download RAW message or body]

Raul Miller wrote:

> Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com> wrote:
> > > > And the GPL zealots claim nothing is compatible, ...
>
> Raul Miller wrote:
> > > Straw man.
>
> Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com> wrote:
> > You are totally shameless.
>
> Ad hominem.
>
> > If I thought it would do any good I could point to the multiple places
> > you and others have made this claim (you most recently not even a few
> > weeks ago on this list), but anyone paying attention to these matters
> > already knows this.
>
> I made no such claim.

OK, from Message ID <19981213194312.X484@test.legi-slate.com>:

> Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com> wrote:
> > You have missed the point: what does it mean to say "under the GPL"?
> > Gee, I guess every time I ask, what does it mean to say "under the
> > GPL", and give a reasoned analysis of what I think it means, you
> > will respond, it means "under the GPL". Well, I have already stated
> > multiple times what I think the three options are for interpreting
> > this, the response above is tautological and vacuous.
>
> The specific language is:
>
>     b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
>     whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
>     part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
>     parties under the terms of this License.
>
> This has to mean that all of the terms of the GPL are present in
> the license which makes the work available to all third parties.
>
> If you disagree there's no point in discussing the matter: this
> is a legal document, it's a simple phrase, get a legal interpretation
> of what that phrase means.
>
> --
> Raul
>
And again from Message ID   <19981213184847.U484@test.legi-slate.com>:

> Andreas Pour <pour@mieterra.com> wrote:
> > I've not glossed over it, I have through detailed analysis concluded
> > that the only "terms of this License" that apply to the complete
> > source code are (a) distribute full source code to everything,
> > including the X or Qt part (which but for that sentence you might not
> > be obligated to do), and (b) do not charge for further redistribution,
> > including of the X or Qt part (which otherwise might be able to do).
>
> But section 2 says that you have the right to modify the GPLed work
> ("the program"), creating a work based on the program provided that
> you release the word based on the program under the GPL (which, in the
> context you create would also be called "the program").
>
> This contradicts your analysis: if your analysis is true you have
> no right to modify the GPLed work and distribute the result.
>
> --
> Raul
>

And there are more instances, but what's the point?

Regards,

Andreas Pour
pour@mieterra.com

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