Hypothetical question...

Gregory Martin Pfeil pfeilgm at technomadic.org
Sat Feb 19 17:05:26 UTC 2000

On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 08:57:46AM -0500, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. wrote:
> Interesting question David! That is exactly the point of my article arguing
> that source code should not be subject to copyright protection in the first
> place. If you did not modify the source code subject to the GPL, then it
> does not seem that the GPL is applicable. HOWEVER, your hypo sounds like a
> strong argument for copyright infringement could be made. Under the right
> circumstances, copyright law permits a copyright holder to argue:
> your access to their source code == copying;

I've had this same question, specifically with regard to the SCSL.  I
would hate to, say, write some kernel code and have it unintentionally
contain whatever from SCSLed code, then have it have to be removed
from the kernel at some point, after a lot of effort has been put into
tweaking it and builing a number of subsystems around it.  This fear
has kept me from looking at code released under a number of "open
source" licenses.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20000219/5b06f34e/attachment.sig>

More information about the License-discuss mailing list