Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> Not really - the FSF has very strong power outside the court - the power of
> the public opinion. When someone is portrayed in 'Good vs. Evil' (GNU vs.
> put_your_name_here), then things beyond legal basis come into the
> picture.
with Steve Jobs being the guy that he is i can't believe this
was going on with NexT/Objective C right now ...
> It doesn't change the fact that the GPL is a very vague legal document
from all the license contracts i have seen this was one of the rather
clear ones after all (and my lawyer thought so too)
although it all comes down to how you define 'derivated work'
after all ...
> which is essentially why people always say the GPL is
> 'what Richard Stallman says it is'.
as with almost every law or general purpose legal document you have
interpretations and/or descriptions of intent besides the pure
'legal speak'
and with RMS being the original author or at least originator and
the one who payed some lawyers to make it do what he requiered it
to do it's quite ok for me to have him be the final interpretative
instance at least as far as code (c)RMS or (c)FSF is concerned
(as for example readline is)
if your definition of compatible vs. derivated work was right
it would render the whole distinction between the GPL and the LGPL
useless after all ...
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
