Conversation
Notices
-
@jmillikin, then I admit I do not know why RPC implementation *must* live in glibc. Developers I trust told me so in 2001 & I believed them
-
RD @mairin: ♺ @spot: The Sun RPC license is finally dead. http://is.gd/eFuo8 YAY!!!!!
-
@lxoliva The code in glibc was forked long ago, but the licence text remained.
-
@webmink point is Oracle distributed GNU libc under LGPL, containing this very code
-
@lxoliva But at the time they would have had no right to do so surely?
-
@webmink yeah, it would have been (induced?) copyright infringement until they bought the Sun RPC copyrights from Sun
-
@lxoliva I've never seen any evidence of sun rpc code under explicit lgpl terms.
-
@spot any evidence that Oracle changed the glibc License: tag from LGPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ with exceptions and GPLv2+?
-
@lxoliva Red Hat changed it with permission from Oracle; see http://bit.ly/cs0u9n
-
@lxoliva license tag on a spec file is A) nonbinding and B) trumped by explicit license on source code
-
@webmink there seems to be a time loop somewhere in this argument ;-) anyhow, I'm glad and thankful that SunRPC is Free for good!
-
@spot you sure there wasn't any room whatsoever for a successful estoppel defense in there? anyhow, thanks for sorting that out!
-
@fontana Estoppel would have been a fine backup defence, but changing the licence was clearly preferable
-
@lxoliva Estoppel defense from lawsuit perhaps but it was still non-free.
-
@spot err... if it could defend from copyright infringement claims in a court of law, what freedom would be missing?
-
@fontana I'd think any information given by © holder that purports to grant disputed rights can strengthen the defense
-
@fontana wow, are there really that many copyright holders redistributing own works obtained under licenses they hadn't offered?
-
@fontana isn't a license the ultimate defense from © lawsuit? if even licenses can be found invalid, what would the standard be?
-
@fontana compare with e.g. patents: sw remains Free even if a patent lawsuit would most likely result in loss of essential freedoms
-
@fontana from that I propose that, if there's a reasonable expectation of getting away exercising the 4 freedoms, it's FaiF
-
@fontana that said, tolerance for risk and mileage may vary
-
@fontana now you got me ;-) I'm convinced, thanks for your persistence. back to the drawing board ;-)
-
Thanks @spot, @fontana, @webmink, @brettcsmith, novalis & everyone who helped fix #problematic #SunRPC license. My blog on it: ur1.ca/1axpt
-
@fontana Given the concept of "non-free" was not documented until 1986 I don't see how that can be the case.
-
@fontana,BTW,when I was writing that paragraph in the blog post this morning, I said in my head: "This is the part Fontana'll disagree with"
-
@fontana, I think we just don't know. It's a matter of opinion, not fact. (BTW, annoying when someone answers on identica but not phone. ;)
-
@fontana sometimes it feels like many copyright lawyers should be non-free as in "behind bars"
-
@mairin: As the Sun RPC is dead we can see http://is.gd/eGKWx that GNU/Linux get more free #linux #gnu
-
@fontana but then, is “must not distribute by itself” enough of a requirement to make it non-Free?
-
@fheinz aha!, that's what “passing the bar exam” is about!
-
@fontana to me the most serious problem was *GPL-incompatibility: GPLed combined works would be non-Free for © infringement
-
All Identi.ca content and data are available under the