Re: GPL (was Re: Free software companies and GPL issues

[s.goswami <archean@xxxxxxx>]

hey arun and others,
                                We have a typical prob on the same lines
regarding licenses. We have the following RFP from a client of ours who wants
to make this application commercial , we are puzzled and confused is the wright
word to use ;-) , what license to use while porting the application on to
linux.

We are having source code for application on Unix and
later ported on Windows NT. The latest version is on Windows NT. The
environment for the software is 
¨ The algorithms were developed in Fortran
¨ The database used is Oracle
¨ The interface with Database and applications algorithms is through Pro*C.
¨ The GUI is with X/Motif.
The total application is about 60 KL code.

Arun please let us know about the legalities about the said case.
and please don't say forget GPL use BSD license ;-)


thanks and regards
s.goswami

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 10:58:33PM -0700, dodobh@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > This means that I can make any changes to gcc, but I am not required
> > to distribute those changes, as long as I am the only one using that
> > particular version of gcc. If I distribute binaries of my version,
> > then I am required to make the source available, not otherwise.
> 
> As I've said before on this list, "distributing binaries" is an
> ill defined term in legal parlance. If bank A has to install the
> modified software at a customer site, which happens to be a
> different legal entity, some lawyers say, the code suddenly is
> subject to GPL, requiring bank A to disclose sources.
> 
> Apart from that, Bank A has to put up with all the innuendo and
> smear campaigns of well known GPL mongers on slashdot and elsewhere.
> 
> Further, RMS has demonstrated an unwillingness to remove such
> legal ambiguities in GPL. Case in point: Python license. The
> CNRI lawyers have a valid point in that a license is meaningless
> unless you specifically say which set of rules it will be interpreted
> in. And all that they wanted to do was specify that the license will
> be interpreted according to the laws in the state of virginia.
> 
> And that makes it "incompatible" with GPL. As some anonymous
> coward said, the only thing that is compatible with GPL is the
> GPL itself :)
> 
> 	-Arun "Say no to GPL" Sharma
----------------------------------------
Archean Infotech Limited
3-6-157,Victory Vihar, Urdu Hall Lane,
Himayatnagar, Hyderabad
ph:091-40-3228666,6570704,3228674
http://www.archeanit.com
----------------------------------------