-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 6-apr-2007, at 15:45, Darren Reed wrote:
You write on misc@openbsd.org:
Would it be wrong to develop software using existing GPL'ed code as
a starting point. And bit by bit rewrite the code until you
have rewritten all of it. Then releasing the final code under an BSD
license?
I still don't know exactly what happened, but I suspect
the process went something like this. Only the code in the
development
phase was public too and this is what pissed of the
developers of the GPL'ed version.
Yes that would be very wrong.
You start off with something that is a derivative work of the GPL'd
code
and continue creating a new derivative of it.
That at the end of the process the code looks nothing like the
original
is not the point. It was created using the original as the basis
of it,
so therefore it is a derived work.
To create something that isn't a derivative requires starting from
scratch and not using other people's work.
If that would be wrong, where do you draw the line?
Do you consider it derivative work when you create a clone of
an application?
Or do you have to look at the original code first for it to be
derivative work?
Maybe you use the original code as documentation to look up some
magic numbers?
I would say you start with a derivative, but not release it yet.
Then piece by piece replace the GPL'ed code with your own code.
Now all code is your own creation.
With the exception of maybe some magic numbers all code is different.
The magic numbers can't be licensed and would be the same even if
you didn't use the GPL'ed code as a reference.
I do believe it would be polite to mention the GPL'ed code and the
developer of it as a source of documentation.
Floor Terra
iD8DBQFGFlU5UnW3VkBpTO4RAoG8AKDevXvwdVld6uTVD9bYeyPGMsI9fQCgzJq/
rxMPUkvEgSvy4xzKmpxtfIw=
=kNV/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
