On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 01:23:19PM +0100, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > Have you considered what they do for GNU bison?
>
> Thinking: I could apply GPL, and then add a line like "In addition to
> the GPL license granted as above an unlimited license is granted to use
> the result obtained by compiling this file (maybe in combination with
> other files) into an executable format (.hex file or equivalent)."
>
> Now a remaining problem is: what whould prevent a person from enhancing
> the library, removing that scentence from the library text, and
> distributing the result? In other words: the GPL is carefully worded to
> be 'sticky'. Such a simple scentence is not. IMHO the same problem
> applies to the Bison case.

What would they gain from that?  In the bison case, it would mean that
code based on the output of this modified bison could only be used for
GPL software, which I'm sure the FSF aren't going to be worried about.

Do you want to ensure that any enhanced version of the library can still
be used in closed-source commercial firmware?

Chris

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics