[haiku-development] Re: INPUT / VOTE : --include-gpl-addons
- From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 23:04:05 +0200
On 2009-08-20 at 22:06:30 [+0200], Urias McCullough <umccullough@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Axel Dörfler<axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
[...]
> I can put together email for the liba52 guys at least, explaining our
> position, and asking their advice. If they are of the opinion that
> Haiku's media kit, or whatever, must also be released under the terms
> of the GPL, then I think we'll have less ground to stand on moving
> forward. Even if we were totally legal, we have no good reason to
> upset the developers of the code we have utilized, as I believe we
> have no intentions to create a disruption in the Open Source community
> over such a small issue :)
>
> Would someone else like to review it privately before I send it? or
> shall I publish it here?
Here is fine I gues.
> >> The FAQs I linked to above make exactly that distinction. And no, the
> >> end
> >> result would not be quite the same, at least not in terms of
> >> efficiency/performance.
> >
> > Yes, the FAQ. Not the license - this makes this non-existent for a
> > lawyer.
>
> Right, the FAQ on FSF is mostly an opinion piece based on the FSF
> interpretation of the license. I would consider this a somewhat
> "biased" view, TBH.
Er, the FSF wrote the darn license, though. So their interpretation is as
close as you can get to the actual intention of the legal text.
CU, Ingo
Other related posts:
