Sun 2003-02-09 12:28, William McBrine (1:106/2000) wrote to andrew clarke:

 ac>> OK, but the issue here is that there isn't any clean way to mix PD 
 ac>> code with existing GPLed code in the same source files without 
 ac>> resorting to either creating diffs or rewriting the code entirely.

 > They don't have to be separated at all -- you can just release the 
 > whole thing under the GPL.

Which means the GPL copyright then covers the PD code.  I've had different
people tell me that you either can or can't make a change to PD code and
then copyright the entire thing, but after having done a bit more research
it seems as though you can, and it's not a big deal.

 > Anyway, I don't quite understand why this would be an issue -- weren't 
 > you _already_ incorporating PD code with code that was copyrighted and
 > distributed under a specific license? Maybe I need to look at the 
 > package to grasp this.

I think the difference here is that the original MSGAPI licence didn't
require the code modifications to be covered by that licence.  Whereas if
you modify GPLed code and distribute it, your modifications have to be
covered by the GPL, ie. you can't modify GPL code and release your changes
to the PD.  But I'm happy to be proven wrong on that point...

 ac>> I'm not a huge fan of the GPL for that reason.

 > I am a huge fan of the GPL, for exactly that reason. :-) The GPL keeps 
 > my code free. The BSD license, by contrast, is basically glorified PD +
 > credit... so anyone can use the code in any way, as long as they give
 > proper credit. While both licenses may have their places, the BSD 
 > license can often be a giveaway to parasites who won't free their
 > derived code in turn. And of course that goes double for PD code,
 > which doesn't even require credit.

There is no scope for anyone who wants to statically-link in a GPL library
- but not modify that library in any way - to release an executable without
being required to release the source code to their program.  It's not a
"derived work", but it's treated as a "combined work",
and so the GPL applies.

Nor may anyone distribute a shared library that has been compiled from the
original unmodified GPLed source without making the source available along
with it.  But this is not such a big issue.

I believe the purposes of the Lesser GPL was to addresses these issues. (?)

-- mail{at}ozzmosis.com

--- Msged/NT 6.1.1