This website is an archive. It was used for drafting and public consultation on GPLv3 and version 3 of other GNU licenses which were published in 2007. For up to date information, see https://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html. For more information about this archive, see https://www.fsf.org/licensing/gplv3-archive

From GPLv3 Wiki

Revision as of 04:54, 31 March 2006 neroden (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff		Current revision stdrange (Talk | contribs) reverted vandalism
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	Simple scenario.	+	Suppose there's some program licensed with an Affero clause such as mentioned in (7d) that requires "the work contain functioning facilities that allow users to immediately obtain copies of its Complete Corresponding Source Code". Then I create a derivative work of it which is ''not'' an interactive program, but a completely non-interactive program with specified output--a 'grep' or 'sed' workalike, perhaps. But there was some large chunk of code from the Affero-licensed application which I found useful for this program.
-	Suppose there's some program licensed with an Affero clause such as mentioned in (7d).	+	How can such a program comply with a 7(d) requirement? Providing quine-like functionality when a special switch is provided (foobar --provide-source) would probably meet the letter of the requirement, but isn't practical. Could the program simply provide a URL where the source can be downloaded? Or provide instructions similar to section 3(b) of GPLv2? The current language doesn't seem to allow it.
-	Suppose I then create a derivative work of it which is *not* an interactive program; in fact, it's a completely non-interactive program with specified output; a 'grep' or 'sed' workalike, perhaps. But there was some large chunk of code from the Affero-licensed application which I found useful for this program.	+	: This is too much of a hypothetical. Are you familiar with the details of the Affero GPL? It's no more restrictive or impractical than the GPL currently is, only instead of an "interactive" clause it has a "network" clause. I don't think we're arguing about whether the Affero GPL is nice or not, but instead "Is it a free license that you think the GPL should be compatible with?" --[[User:ashawley|ashawley]] 16:13, 3 June 2006 (EDT)
-	I'm screwed. There's no way to provide the feature required by the Affero clause without breaking my program's interface.	+	What if the requirement were rewritten to apply to a human (the person making the program available), rather than a restriction on the technical details of the program being written? As a human, I could easily satisfy the requirement to provide source to all the users of my program, even if it's not practical for the program to do this.
-	This indicates that the Affero clauses allowed by (7d) are in fact non-free. They should be rewritten as a requirement applying to a human (the person making the program available), not a restriction on the technical details of the program being written. As a human, I could easily satisfy the requirement to provide source to all the users of my program; but my program cannot and must not satisfy that requirement.	+	: There are already requirements by the GPL on making available the corresponding source by a host of methods (human or otherwise), but the condition to preserve interactive notices and commands is an additional mandatory requirement. --[[User:ashawley|ashawley]] 16:13, 3 June 2006 (EDT)
-		+
-	(Incidentally, I dual-license this text under the GPL (any version), because the current version of the GFDL has serious design flaws. All edits to this page assumed to be licensed similarly.)	+

---

Current revision

Suppose there's some program licensed with an Affero clause such as mentioned in (7d) that requires "the work contain functioning facilities that allow users to immediately obtain copies of its Complete Corresponding Source Code". Then I create a derivative work of it which is not an interactive program, but a completely non-interactive program with specified output--a 'grep' or 'sed' workalike, perhaps. But there was some large chunk of code from the Affero-licensed application which I found useful for this program.

How can such a program comply with a 7(d) requirement? Providing quine-like functionality when a special switch is provided (foobar --provide-source) would probably meet the letter of the requirement, but isn't practical. Could the program simply provide a URL where the source can be downloaded? Or provide instructions similar to section 3(b) of GPLv2? The current language doesn't seem to allow it.

This is too much of a hypothetical. Are you familiar with the details of the Affero GPL? It's no more restrictive or impractical than the GPL currently is, only instead of an "interactive" clause it has a "network" clause. I don't think we're arguing about whether the Affero GPL is nice or not, but instead "Is it a free license that you think the GPL should be compatible with?" --ashawley 16:13, 3 June 2006 (EDT)

What if the requirement were rewritten to apply to a human (the person making the program available), rather than a restriction on the technical details of the program being written? As a human, I could easily satisfy the requirement to provide source to all the users of my program, even if it's not practical for the program to do this.

There are already requirements by the GPL on making available the corresponding source by a host of methods (human or otherwise), but the condition to preserve interactive notices and commands is an additional mandatory requirement. --ashawley 16:13, 3 June 2006 (EDT)