To: <vnc-list@realvnc.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: What good is VNC's GPL?
Sorry for the delay guys. Since their are a few e-mails I will try to respond to them in one response.
The reason for the rash response was not because of the question but more of who I felt the question was coming from. Bob Smith, if I am mistaken of your identity I sincerely apologize. I was a lover of the product before I started doing this position and I have seen for years on how this person has degraded the product for his own benefit. I let my passion for the product come before the position for the company and I hope no one takes it as a general "shut up", because it is not. Yury has built a strong product here and my actions aren't really representative of the company he has built. I have some learning to do. Now for the response.
Our product is a wrapper around the TightVNC code. Before the ViewerX development had been started, we were aware about circumstances of using GPLed code. And since the intention was to build a commercial component, we decided to make it GPL savvy and build a wrapper. That is about the best I can give you. The difficulty we have answering these questions comes from how far we must answer them. Unfortunately a few people try to ask questions to reveal how our proprietary code works. So it is difficult for us to answer more than that.
I hope this is satisfactory to what you are looking for. If you would like any more information please e-mail me or use one of our contacts at www.s-code.com
Thank you,
That is exactly what I was looking for and thank you.
Mind you, a lawyer might not be satisfied due to the possible ways of defining "derivative work" and "dependant upon" but for my part I'm satisfied and I'd hope most other would be too. It doesn't do any of us any good to actually get in the way of progress.
About the other question...
I was thinking about that possibility too, about becoming instantly in violation of the gpl the moment you decide to give away only part of your work.
Given the existence of such high profile things as ghostscript and vnc, I'm assuming the gpl allows for this in some sane manner.
I have a menuing routine that I wrote for my companies quite expensive custom software, and then I gave away that routine, and I'd be shot if it turned out that by doing so I gave away our whole application.
Rather than take that chance I made it even less than bsd style and just said "here, no stipulations".
Perhaps I should have at least made it impossible for someone to take it, copyright it, and then come after ME for using it! :)
Technically, I guess since I didn't apply any license, that that scenario is not impossible. Then again, since I didn't specify anything, I think there are "default" rules that are reasonably sane that protect me from that as long as I can prove somehow that I wrote it or at least had it at an earlier date than the earliest date they could prove having it. .oO(la la la wishful thinking la la la oh shi-...)
:)
Brian K. White -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.aljex.com/bkw/ +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++. filePro BBx Linux SCO Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD #callahans Satriani _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list VNC-List@realvnc.com To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
