Much of the code in the Icon Program Library, as well as Icon, are in
the public domain (i.e., distributed without a license, see
http://www.rosenlaw.com/html/GL15a.pdf), where it was placed long before
the GPL was well known. (I have not even heard what the licensing terms
are for Unicon.) If something is already in the public domain, then
nobody owns it, so who can assume the authority to put it under the
protection of the GPL/LGPL?
A software doesnt need to be GPL to become a GNU package. The only
requisite is that the program must be Free Software (that it, it must
follow the Free Software Definition). These are many GNU packages
licensed with XFree like licenses, for example.
As public domain software, Icon conform to the free software
definition.
On the other way, the public domain status in compatible with the GPL
(that is, we can license our added software and our modification with
GPL). From http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html:
Public Domain.
Being in the public domain is not a license--rather, it means the
material is not copyrighted and no license is needed. Practically
speaking, though, if a work is in the public domain, it might as
well have an all-permissive non-copyleft free software license.
Public domain status is compatible with the GNU GPL.
--
Jose E. Marchesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GNU Spain http://es.gnu.org
GNUs Not Unix! http://www.gnu.org
--
"And if cynics ridicule freedom, ridicule community... if 'hard nosed
realists' say that profit is the only ideal...just ignore them, and
use copyleft all the same." -- RMS
---
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
