<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [OT?] GPL v3 FUD, was For Approval: MLL (minimal library license)</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>> From a section 7 perspective, the BSDL is not an "additional permission". </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>> It's an additional restriction, or a set of additional restrictions. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT>...</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>>Technically, however, the BSDL contains additional restrictions<BR>>in relation to the GPL, one of which is the preservation of the<BR>>(relatively permissive) license notice. There's no additional permission<BR>>that you can remove in the BSDL, because, even if you regard the<BR>>permissions inside BSDL as "additional" in relation to GPLv3 (though I<BR>>don't think this really matches the definition of "additional<BR>>permission" given in section 7), they are bound to and inseparable from<BR>>the license preservation requirement, which is an additional<BR>>restriction. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>It is a weird set of doublethink to turn BSDL from additional permissions to additional restrictions vis a vis the GPL because you aren't allowed to remove the text that grants you permission to use the code.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>However, restriction or not, it would seem that the preservation of the license notice could be seen/misinterpreted to fall under the ability to "add a restriction" via section 7b "Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal Notices displayed by works containing it"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>which could then be read/misinterpreted by a layperson (a.k.a. programmer) as removable via </FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>"If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2>Given the PySoy GPL V3 weirdness with Section 7 I'd say that particular section is subject to discussion/confusion/excessive silliness. I'm going to guess PySoy's implementation of Section 7 exceeds the "intended reading" of Section 7 and stumbled into the realm of logoware. IANAL, etc.</FONT></DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>From the perspective of a coder it's odd in the context of a software license that someone would argue on how something was "intended to be read" given that our trade instills a certain affinity for preciseness in statements because a compiler doesn't care what you intended. Just what you typed. Folks seeking to abuse your license care even less and can apply human intelligence toward trying to thwart your intentions.</FONT></P>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT size=2><BR><BR><BR><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>