[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANN: hakyll-0.1

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

Tom Tobin wrote:

> IANAL either,

Ditto!

> but my understanding is that judges take a very dim view
> of attempts like this to evade the requirements of a license. 

I can't see how any judge could possibly come to that conclusion
in this case.

Studying the terms of the GPL and the BSD3 a lawyer would come to
the conclusion that the terms of the GPL are narrower than the
terms of the BSD3 but that independently developed code under the
BSD3 license can be linked to GPL code as long as the terms of
the GPL are followed.

For instance, there are many BSD licensed drivers in the GPL
licensed Linux kernel.

> If a
> piece of software is built on another piece of software, it doesn't
> matter if you're looking at source code or a binary.

The GPL makes this distinction. The GPL says if you distribute a binary
from GPL sources you must release the sources as well. It does not
however say that if you release sources you must also release binaries.

> I can write the SFLC and pose a hypothetical situation that captures
> the gist of what we're talking about, and post the response here, if
> anyone is interested.

I suggest that you put together a question, post it here for comments
and when there is some form of concensus pass the question on the the
SFLC.

Erik
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/