---- START NEW MESSAGE --- Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109] by dpmail10.doteasy.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.05) id A9FB2684007A; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:14:03 -0800 Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <9.00CC130B@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:58:30 -0500 Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 5145 for PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:58:22 -0500 Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 0901; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:57:48 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.11] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via TCP with ESMTP ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:57:47 EST X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by smtp-out1.xs4all.nl Received: from PAARD (a213-84-20-53.adsl.xs4all.nl [213.84.20.53]) by smtp-out1.xs4all.nl (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0SIviDd079125 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:57:44 +0100 (CET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Message-ID: <002401c3e5d0$9daffaa0$0b00a8c0@PAARD> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:57:44 +0100 Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list Sender: pic microcontroller discussion list From: Wouter van Ooijen Organization: Van Ooijen Technische Informatica Subject: Re: [OT]: JAL licensing (was SCO lobbying Congress about Linux) To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU In-Reply-To: <28010428.38591@webbox.com> Precedence: list X-RCPT-TO: Status: U X-UIDL: 371856150 > I'm wondering if you're putting more into this JAL library > question than is actually there. That might be true, in some sense :) > The fact that a compiler is GPL'ed does not mean that it's > output from a propriatary program is automatically GPL'ed. true > So, in a hypothetical JAL program that does not use any > library functions, the output from the GPL'ed JAL compiler > is not under the GPL. true, it is a derivate of the input > Now, forgive me if the JAL compiler works differently, but > if the library is not explicitly included in the source > program to be compiled i.e. the user does not cut-and- > paste the JAL library source into his program, it's put > there by the compiler, even though the user might have a > line like > #include "library.h" > then the user has not put the GPL'ed library code into his > program, it's the action of the compiler that does this. It does not matter who does what, the result is legally a derivate of both the user code and the libraries (as far as used). Forgive me for being arrogant, but I had a number of legal classes in my university years, and my father-in-law is a very experienced patent attorney. I do know about some (most?) of the subtleties, and I did investigate a number of obvious solutions and they all turned out inadequate. One suggestion that has been made a few times is to add/modify the GPL. Not possible: the GPL is a carefully crafted document, a small change made by me would seriously degrade the quality (that is: it might result in a license that inadvertently does not do what I want it to do). And besides: it is copyrighted! Another suggestion is to apply the GPL, and in each source file add a license statement that gives a free ride to the compiled code (like BISON). But the GPL allows all modifications of the source, including removing that extra license. And I can not add an extra clause to the GPL, see above. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products -- 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 .