On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 08:01:24 -0600
EBo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Looks like we need to email EFF or GNU for a determination.  Matt
> what you say is that 0MQ allows linking to anything, but GPLv2
> requires that anything linked must then convey GPLv2, then GPL is the
> problem and LCNC cannot use 0MQ due to now necessarly needing to
> convey the conditions of GPLv2.  I will say though that it does not
> make sense that a GPLv2 must only use GPLv2 libraries and cannot link
> to anything else.

We don't need to do anything :) We have the explicit, written
permission of the copyright owners to use 0MQ in our GPLv2 project as
long as we share with them any changes we make, if any, to the actual
0MQ source code. Specifically, they say:

"To be clear: you can use libzmq (and any other 0MQ project with the
same license) in a GPLv2 project, both as a dynamic library, and in a
static link. If you make patches, you need to publish them, as usual.
There's no reason there would be any restrictions for GPLv2 projects
since the license is designed to work with all application licenses
including commercial closed source."

The copyright owners have granted us permission to link to their
libraries. This permission supersedes any restriction that may appear
in the LGPLv3 text. Since only copyright owners can enforce copyrights,
and we have their permission to use their work, who will object? Who
will sue us? The license itself, nor the license authors (FSF), have a
say in this matter.

A dog wags its tail, not the other way around :) A copyright owner can
license his work in any way he chooses. He might permit you unlimited
use, he may forbid me any use, and everyone else may receive a license
permitting limited use. As another example, I live in 15 acres of
woods. I have posted NO TRESPASSING/NO HUNTING signs. I don't want just
any yokel and his brother out there shooting the place up! However, my
buddies Kevin and Brian come over in the fall and hunt deer because
there are a lot of deer here and I have given them permission to hunt.
I _don't_ have to take down all the signs so they can go hunting :) If
a game warden catches them, he'll bring them up to the house to be sure
I actually gave them permission to hunt. If I say they have permission,
he _won't_ arrest them for trespassing or hunting just because of the
signs :)

In short, licenses can't restrict the rights of copyright owners to do
as they please with their work. The tail can't wag the dog!

Thanks,
Matt

P.S. We are bound by the warranty, anti-tivoization, patent, and other
terms of the (L)GPLv3 if we use 0MQ. The exception granted by the 0MQ
folks to their users only relieves us from worries about linking. If
someone using a 0MQ based version of linuxcnc tried to engage in
"tivoization" the 0MQ folks could sue to prevent 0MQ being used this
way. For more information on the issue of "tivoization", see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoization

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to