Mozilla Public License 2 Alpha 3; request for early review prior to formal submission for approval

[John Cowan]

Rick Moen scripsit:

> > Sorry, but in this scenario I clearly posit the case where Bob creates
> > not simply an archive but a linked executable which is distributed
> > under GPL, thus triggering GPL requirements to release the complete
> > corresponding source under GPL.  (to Carol)
> 
> I'm with John Cowan:  This seems like just the urban legend that refuses
> to die.
> 
> Specific performance is not even available as a remedy for copyright
> violation.  Plaintiff gets to enjoin further infringement, plus (if the
> work is registered) some degree of monetary damages.  

You and Andy are on different tracks.  The issue that Andy and I
are discussing does not have to do with having to release source, and
what the remedies are if you don't.  It has to do with whether you are
required to release the source *under the GPL* when parts of it are
under a permissive license.

The wording of GPLv3 Section 6 is:  "You may convey a covered work in
object code form under the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you
also convey the machine-readable Corresponding Source /under the terms
of this License/" (emphasis added).  This suggests that *all* the source
must be GPLed.  That isn't, on the surface, consistent with the normal
liberty to mix GPL and permissive code in the same "corresponding source".

The corresponding wording of GPLv2 Section 3-3a is: "You may copy
and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2)
in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2
above provided that you also do one of the following: a) Accompany it
with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which
must be distributed /under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above/"
(emphasis added).  Same issue.

Now if the GPL really requires that *each* part of the source be under
the GPL, then it would be necessary to make a derived work out of the
BSD parts and release those derived works under the GPL.  But nobody
thinks that.

-- 
John Cowan    http://ccil.org/~cowan    cowan at ccil.org
SAXParserFactory [is] a hideous, evil monstrosity of a class that should
be hung, shot, beheaded, drawn and quartered, burned at the stake,
buried in unconsecrated ground, dug up, cremated, and the ashes tossed
in the Tiber while the complete cast of Wicked sings "Ding dong, the
witch is dead."  --Elliotte Rusty Harold on xml-dev