Raul Miller wrote: [ ... ]
> > He is technically literate, and is an avid FreeBSD user and active > > software developer. He established a BBS in 1983 that later became > > part of FidoNet and was in service for a total of 14 years. > > > > He analysed part of Andreas' interpretation for me free of charge. > > This was done on an informal basis (during our lunchbreak). > > Unfortunately I don't feel like broadcasting his name on the net. I > > would like to give a list of his findings. In the following list "he" > > refers to the copyright lawyer and "he agreed" means the copyright > > lawyer agreed with the portion of Andreas Pour's interpretation being > > discussed. > > I the potential for problems with this. For example, directing his > attention to certain aspects of the license during lunch, you'd likely be > glossing over what I see as the major flaw of Andreas Pour's argument: > his concept of what a program is (he seems to think that a program is a > file, where the GPL indicates that the usual case is that a program is > a collection of files). Wrong, I don't think that a Program is a single file. I don't know where you come up with this stuff . . . [ ... ] > > * He agreed that one could not relicense software under the XFree > > license+++ under the GPL, as the XFree license prohibits this. > > No problem. Glad you agree with that . . . . This does pose problems with Gnome/Gimp/etc., under my understanding of your reading, which appears to require that the entire work -- including dynamically linked libraries -- be licensed under the GPL. Ciao, Andreas
