> Microsoft makes a copy of FreeWord called M$freeword. Then they port it
> to windows. Then they start adding functions like read_M$_worddoc(),
> decrypt_propritary_M$_fileformats(), play_well_with_other_M$apps(),
> descease_random_crash_freq(), enhance_FW_GUI() to their standard windows
> libs. These functions are designed to 'enhance' FreeWord, they are closed
> source and propritary. They are only distributed with the $199 Win '99
> upgrade. They may not be copied or modified.
>
> Then they sell copies of FreeWord for $100, and on the CD they include
> their modified sources. Their modifications mostly consist of calls to
> those above functions. Although it is under the GPL, it is useless without
> the '99 upgrade. All of their enhancements are propritary, and the only
> advantage that the GPL had here over a BSD licence is that it made it a
> bit tougher. The GPL is supposted to prevent embrace and extend. If we
> allow 'system libs' then this can be circumvented.
I think we should decide, whether the non-GPL product linked to the
GPL product is useful on its own (or within another product) or not.
QT is useful in other products.
By the way: Would it be legal to distribute a patch that changes my
Gimp installation so that it can be used in combination with QT? In
this case the user qould modify the GPL code himself...
Thomas
-- Thomas Gschwind Email: tom@infosys.tuwien.ac.at Distributed Systems Group Tel: +43(1)58801x4469 A-1040, Argentinierstrasse 8 Fax: +43(1)5058453
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html