Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 07:51:19PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > > > Do we know for a fact that: > > > > a) the FSF is aware that the NetBSD folks ships gcc with their operating > > > system, > > > b) the FSF is aware that the NetBSD code that gcc links against is still > > > old-style BSD, > > > c) the FSF has *explicitly stated* that NetBSD can legally ship gcc with > > > their OS under these circumstances > > > I know (a) for a fact, and I know that it was perfectly well aware of > > (b) as well, at least before BSD announced its change. > > > The FSF's position is that the noxious advertising clause is not > > enforceable in the United States, and so, in the US at least, is not > > in conflict with the GPL. > > Thank you for that clarification. I'm not sure where that puts Debian, > however, if the legality of this is based on the particulars of US law.
Debian's usual rule has been to think about general international law. However, I think in certain cases, it's worth being a little, um, gentle in our application. I think the present situation is such a case. I think it's worth moving slowly, and thinking very carefully about what we hope to accomplish before making any significant moves.
