EULA with GPL??

2002-12-17 Thread Terry Hancock
This came up in a local LUG ML I participate in ( http://www.sgvlug.org ) recently: Does the GPL as written (Vers. 2) allow a distributor of a modified software to impose a *use* restriction on users? At first, I thought, No way!, but I see the other guy's point ... Section 0, says in part:

Re: EULA with GPL??

2002-12-17 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 02:01 AM, Terry Hancock wrote: Does the GPL as written (Vers. 2) allow a distributor of a modified software to impose a *use* restriction on users? At first, I thought, No way!, but I see the other guy's point ... Iff the law were to allow such

Re: EULA with GPL??

2002-12-17 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 11:01:52PM -0800, Terry Hancock wrote: Does section 6 guarantee that the usage right is kept, or is it somehow guaranteed in law, or is there another section which addresses this (I've looked of course, but didn't see anything that seems to do it). Hmm. Thinking

Re: EULA with GPL??

2002-12-17 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 02:56 AM, Glenn Maynard wrote: The GPL doesn't remove my right to sign a contract promising not to do something, and I believe this is a commonplace and legitimate--if annoying--practice that the GPL supports: companies can have employees sign NDAs, preventing

Re: EULA with GPL??

2002-12-17 Thread Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED]: As for relevance to Debian, can one assume that the GPL absolutely guarantees DFSG free? (As I'm pretty sure the DFSG *does* guarantee me this right). No. Patents can get in your way. We have GPL software (e.g., gimp-nonfree, due to Unisys patents