On 8/4/2010 2:26 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:27 PM, tom honermann <tom.honerm...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 8/4/2010 11:25 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
There are free software license that are not GPL, for example the
modified BSD license. Pointing you to non-free software would be
wrong, since such software subjugates your rights as a computer user.
Ah, yes, if only the world were that simple. Alas, the world consists of
many software producers that do not share this view, but still function in
accordance with the laws of their respective governments. I'm
attempting to identify (at least) one of them.
The tone of these messages seem...unfriendly to the practice. I've
seen software that does what you describe, but I see no reason to
identify them to be pilloried for it.
What problem are you trying to solve?
Philip Guenther
I have no reason or desire to cast judgment on anyone complying with
legal requirements. I've been
trying to choose my words carefully to avoid portraying in either a
positive or negative light, the
practice of aggregating free and proprietary software. I guess I have
not been fully successful
at that...
I have a need to distribute a build system with a proprietary product.
I have no influence over the
licensing of the proprietary product. I do have influence over the
design of the build system and
I would like that build system to be based on GNU make. For ease of
use, I would like to
distribute GNU make with the proprietary product so that our users do
not have to acquire a
copy of GNU make on their own. This puts us in the position of needing
to distribute a GPL'd
product with our proprietary product - something which I need approval
from our legal department
to do.
I am not seeking legal advice, comments about the legality or ethicality
of such aggregated works,
or comments regarding requirements of the GPL licenses. I'm looking for
companies that are
distributing such aggregated works as examples I can use to show that
such aggregation is being
done by other companies without (presumably) legal repercussions (which
assumes that the
copyright holders are aware of the aggregated work and believe that the
use does not infringe
on the requirements of the GPL)
Your point is well taken Philip. If you trust that I have no desire to
deride those engaging in this
practice, a private email would be appreciated. Otherwise, I
respectfully acknowledge your
(and anyone else's) desire not to name names either publicly or privately.
Tom.
_______________________________________________
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
