W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Option 3

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 08:18:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4D89E509.7060407@intertwingly.net>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: public-html@w3.org, PSIG <member-psig@w3.org>
On 03/22/2011 10:18 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On 03/22/2011 09:16 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would still maintain that "Option 3" is not compatible with GPL
>>>> though. While the license doesn't explicitly forbid copying the text
>>>> under the license into another specification, it effectively forbids it
>>>> by not allowing it. I'll note that GPL doesn't limit itself to "explicit
>>>> restrictions", but rather restrictions in general.
>>>
>>> Indeed. There are non-forking-related restrictions too, e.g. it doesn't
>>> allow use in hardware devices, as far as I can tell. Lawrence never
>>> publicly replied to my e-mail on the subject:
>>>
>>>      http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0209.html
>>>
>>> (Search in particular for the bit where I quote the GPL FAQ.)
>>
>> I encourage you to read this:
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-psig/2011JanMar/0138.html
>
> I did.
>
>> If after reading that, if you have further questions about the GPL FAQ,
>> see the following for information on how to get more information:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#LicensingMailingList
>
> I have no questions about the GPL FAQ. Why do you think I do? I have
> questions about "Option 3", which is clearly incompatible with the GPL
> since the GPL applies to "The Program" which is defined as meaning any
> copyrightable work, whereas "Option 3" refers only to software, which
> excludes many classes of copyrightable works such as hardware. See the
> e-mail I cite above for more details.

The question you posed was:

"So can we combine code released under the GPL with a work released
under this license into one larger program?"

The answer to that question is

"Yes, it is possible to combine code released under the GPL with a work 
released under this license into one larger program"

You seem to be interpreting the FAQ in ways different than the authors 
of that very same FAQ.  Perhaps the FAQ needs to be clarified?

Meanwhile, nothing in the corner case you believe you have found affects 
any of the use cases that this working group put forward.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 12:18:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:23 UTC