Introduction, Licensing Question and the Introspector Project
Francois-Rene Rideau <email@example.com>
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:52:22 +0200
> My question is if there is any way that a GPled program could prevent
> such added value information from being extracted from it.
Firstly, I see no reason why you would or should try to prevent that.
Of course, the "no linking to a GPL program without being GPLed" clause
means that programs that are specifically link to this information
must be GPLed. But of course, generic programs that can make use of this
information as well as any other information need not be GPLed
(the scripts that use the information and any specific routines
invoked by those scripts only might have to, however).
In the end, it will be a lawyer battle to determine where the GPL stops.
Ouch. Don't feed the sharks - use the bugroff license
My 1999 article "Metaprogramming and Free Availability of Sources"
might help understanding that deep down, all these licensing restrictions
are something evil that one should not invoke lightly.
PS: I'm a bit sick of licensing discussions on firstname.lastname@example.org.
What about other issues regarding cybernetics?
[ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ]
[ TUNES project for a Free Reflective Computing System | http://tunes.org ]
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who shall watch the watchmen themselves?)
-- Juvenal, Satires, VI, 347