> The entirety of http://www.gnu.org/manual/ddd/html_mono/ddd.html is > _not_ the license of GDB. > > GDB's license is just the GPL, specifically, it is the section marked > "Note: License" on that page. > > The text you quotes is not part of the license, and so it's not legally > binding. It's just an explination of the GPL, which allows you to copy > any GPL'd program you find.
What is legally binding is neither the text I quoted nor the text to which you refer. Rather, it is the interpretation of the text to which you refer (and possibly other documents) by a judge of competent jurisdiction (or a similar decision maker). To my knowledge, there has been no such interpretation. So, I turn to the next best thing: an interpretation in the text that accompanies the license. I don't think this makes me silly. Can you point me to an interpretation that is any closer to the source? Specifically, that interpretation says that a user may, without authorization, take my computer resources, and I think this goes way too far. Paul Serice
