SOS license

[Alex Nicolaou]

Bruce Perens wrote:
> 
> From: Alex Nicolaou <anicolao at cgl.uwaterloo.ca>
> > So, if I start with gdb, which prints such a notice, and publish a patch
> > under terms that indicate that every end user must pay for the patched
> > version, I have generated a useless patch. Either the user isn't allowed
> > to modify the program with my patch under the terms of the license,
> > because my patch changes the start-up banner of gdb to indicate that it
> > is non-free, or the user isn't allowed to apply my patch since they
> > cannot do so and still follow my license that says that all users must
> > pay me for the patch.
> 
> There's a third alternative. You are allowed to distribute the patch, and
> people are allowed to apply it, but they aren't allowed to distribute the
> result beyond hteir own system.

I don't see how this can work in my example. It can be split into two
cases:

1. If my patch modifies the banner that gives the user the right to
redistribute, then the resulting program violates the license and the
end user is not permitted to modify the software, since clause 5 says
"You are not required to accept this License ... However, nothing else
grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program" - meaning
that if my patch violates the license, the end user cannot apply it
without violating the license. 

2. On the other hand, if my patch doesn't modify the startup banner,
then every *end user* of the software has the right to redistribute my
patch under the terms of the GPL. The software tells them so; there's no
allowance for them to be allowed to apply the patch and not distribute
it, since clause 5 specifically says you must comply with the GPL to
have the right to modify the source code.

What you seem to be suggesting is that the GPL doesn't restrict what I
can do in the privacy of my own system; however, as I read the GPL it
does. In order to modify the code, even for personal use, I must accept
the license. 

> Yes, there are ways to break the GPL. Unfortunately, you aren't fixing any
> of them.

Well, perhaps someone else will. My overall goal is not to "fix" the GPL
-- that job I leave to the FSF. The GPL has a high degree of acceptance,
so it is obvious that the things that bother me about it don't bother
everyone!

alex