On 07/23/2009 11:28 PM, graham_k wrote:
Can someone tell me definitively - if I use a ten line GPLed function, say
quicksort, in 500,000 lines of code which I write myself, do I need to GPL
all of my source code and make the ode free for all?
If you want a definitive answer you should contact a lawyer.
What makes you think 10 lines would be exempt? Is there some part of the
GPL that makes you think this?
Realistically - the GPL would have some sort of limits that the
copyright owner would have difficulty enforcing. For example, a
copyright license is not the same as a patent or trademark and the
chances that I write 10 lines the exact same as 10 of your lines, for a
well known algorithm, are actually pretty high. If you GPL'ed your
lines, and I never looked at your lines - the GPL cannot stop me from
using my 10 lines even if they exactly match yours. However, it would
raise questions, and if you sued me, I would probably have to show
evidence that I had never seen your lines before.
This is why it's bad to even LOOK at GPL code. Above, it hints that you
have looked. If you have looked - how can you truly say that the lines
you reproduce from your head are not a derivation? Sure you could change
the variables around and move some of the blocks around to achieve the
same effect while making it look different - but in truth, you have
derived their source, and if you do not put the GPL on your software,
you are violating their rights. You would be stealing their
implementation without a valid license (in effect even if not in intent).
That all said - I see the GPL as being similarly evil to patents. The
concept is that the idea can be owned by a person or entity, and this
ownership grants the person the right to limit access to the idea. The
GPL is not a free license. It is a restrictive license that plays with
the concept of *enforcing* freedom. I want to see the patent office
closed, and I'd like to see the GPL invalidated in a court of law. 10
lines of code that provide nothing exceptionally unique that could be
easily re-written by somebody else who has knowledge of the algorithm
should not be possible to protect in ANY way. It is not providing unique
value that requires protection in order to encourage people to
contribute. The proof of this for me is that other licenses that are far
more free have communities that thrive just as well as the GPL
communities. People like the GPL, or they like the BSD license. But,
when it really comes down to it, a person looking to contribute to a
project does not usually say "I refuse to participate in your project
because it has a BSD license." The GPL is evil and deserves to be struck
down.
Oops - I think this will get me kicked out of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org list. :-)
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke<m...@mielke.cc>
