From: d86-emh@dront.nada.kth.se (E Magnus Hulthen)
Subject: Re: GNU software
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
	<1992Sep9.151416.529@hellgate.utah.edu>
	<1992Sep10.132338.8801@njitgw.njit.edu>
	<1992Sep10.130029.27716@hellgate.utah.edu>
	<1992Sep10.212739.23947@mksol.dseg.ti.com>
	<1992Sep11.091558.10319@cam-orl.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:27:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.091558.10319@cam-orl.co.uk>, thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert) writes
>In article <1992Sep10.212739.23947@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>|> In <1992Sep10.130029.27716@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>|> 
>|> >In article <1992Sep10.132338.8801@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>|> >>
>|> >>Do you mean to imply that GNU isn't freely usable?
>
>|> >No, I'm not implying, I said it flat out.
>
>|> Well, that's not exactly true.  First, I had heard that RMS was
>|> looking at modifying the Copyleft somewhat to help address this
>|> problem.
>
>So there *IS* a problem!

The GNU compilers do not impose any restrictions on the code produced
by the compilers. If you link the GNU libraries you have to state this
clearly in the software and/or in the documentation for the software.
You also have to offer to supply your customer with a linkable binary
object and the source for the library to enable them to fix any bugs
they may find in the library. Note that you ONLY have to give
the source for the library NOT for you own program which uses the
library. The is called the GLPL.
The bison (yacc-a-like) preparser is however fully restricted by the 
GPL. Any source code produced by bison must also be copy lefted.
This may be what Fred referred to as "the problem".

>
>|> And it is a semantic issue, but it is still "freely usable" -- you
>|> simply have to comply with the license requirements,
>
>This seems to use a rather interesting definition of the word "free".
>
>"You are free to do anything you like as long as you follow the rules"


As is stated (quite frequently) in GNU documents you should not confuse
free of charge with freedom to use though. For example Motorola uses
the GNU C compiler with a special backend for a DSP. This compiler
can either be bought in binary format (expensive) where it is supported 
as well. Or it may be bought in source form at a nominal tape fee
(cheap) which is not supported. 


>
>GNU software has a very open license, but the only freely usable software is
>PD software.
>
>|> just as you do with any other piece of software.
>
>Wrong. PD software, by definition, has no restrictions one what you may do
>with it.
>

 
Well it seems to me that the only restriction in GNU software is that
you are not able to restraint other users. With PD software you are
free to rehack it, enable a restrictive licensing scheme, and sell it
at exhorbitant prices, naturally keeping your hack as "proprietary
trade secret". 


>	Tim.
>
>Tim Glauert, Olivetti Research Limited,		| EMAIL	thg@cam-orl.co.uk
>24a Trumpington Street, Cambridge, England.	| TEL	+44   223  343232
						| FAX	+44   223  313542
					/Magnus Hulthen
					d86-emh@nada.kth.se