* Erik Hofman -- Friday 14 May 2004 13:31:
> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> > No, it's not GPL compatible. Public Domain alone would be GPL compatible,
> > but the GPL doesn't allow additional restrictions. And, even if that sounds
> > ridiculous, "may use it for any nonviolent purposes" implies the restriction
> > to use it for "violent purposes" (whatever this is).
> Hmm, the only time I can see it being used for violent purposes it for
> testing how to fly it into something. I'm quite comfortable with that
> restriction to be honest.
You can, and I can. But the GPL can't. Whether we like violence or not, is not
the point. If the model is compatible with the GPL is what counts. And changing
the license policy of fgfs is probably not debateable.
> Using the aircraft for target practicing (shooting simulated drops of
> paint at it) is can hardly be called violent use _of the King Air_ itself.
And that's the other problem. *If* the GPL allowed additional restrictions,
who would decide what "violent purposes" are? This makes the whole clause
completely arbitrary. Just find the original authors, explain the GPL and
its implications and get the permission. Nothing easier than that! ;-)
Flightgear-devel mailing list