Re: fwd -- Re: LYNX-DEV OS/2 blowoff

[Foteos Macrides]

Bela Lubkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > You did not reply to my previous query.
>> > 
>> > There is now a live discussion in the Lynx developers' list on the
>> > subject: is Derek J. Decker violating the GNU Public License under which
>> > current Lynx versions are developed and distributed?
>> 
>> The answer to that question is no. The sources thatI started from were 2-4-1,
>> and were never covered by the GPL or any other license agreement.  
>
>2-4-1 was/is covered by the University of Kansas's copyright statements.
>Those statements constitute some sort of a license (but I am not a
>lawyer...).  Also, according to Foteos Macrides, the GPL *was* in effect
>by that point.
>
>> > You are advised to join the discussion before it gets really ugly.
>> 
>> Enough has been forwarded to me to see that ugliness has ensued.  It is 
>> because of this type of ugliness that I do not subscribe to the list, and
>> do not wish contact with the rest of the Lynx community.
>
>This argument is circular.  The ugliness has come about *because* you
>avoid contact with the Lynx community.
>
>Someone posted to the list several messages you had posted on USENET
>about the development of Lynx/2, in which (I interpret) you were
>boasting about ways in which Lynx/2 was better than Lynx (tables, Java,
>etc.) and that you would incorporate other more recent Lynx features but
>do so "better" than the Lynx developers.  This fosters the impression
>that you have an axe to grind with the Lynx community.  Well, whatever
>it was was at least 3 years ago.  Bury it.
>
>You're being invited to rejoin the Lynx community.  Several other ports
>have recently been incorporated into the mainline (DOS-32 and Windows,
>in particular).  If your work was integrated into the mainline, you
>would be able to spend your Lynx time on areas for which you are
>uniquely qualified, such as perhaps Java integration, tables, etc.,
>instead of having to reinvent the wheel on things like frames
>workarounds.  (Also, if you have been incorporating *any* new code since
>the GPL was first applied to Lynx, then you are certainly violating the
>GPL.  To avoid that, you truly must reinvent all those wheels yourself.)

        Just to be clear about this, Lynx (all versions, in the past or
in the future) is copyrighted by UKans.  When Ukans attached a GNU General
Public License "rider" to it's copyright, that became the requirement for
using Lynx code (vanilla or modified).  Stop thinking in terms of "before"
versus "after" the rider was applied.  If he had modified Lynx v1.0, he
still should make his modified sources available on request, because a
rider to that effect has been placed of the copyright, period.  He retains
copyright on his contributions, as we all do, meaning he can use them in
any other software he generates, with no obligation to UKans or the Lynx
community, but he does not have a right of refusal for requests that he
provide the sources for his modified version of Lynx (i.e, software that
includes the "work done for hire" at UKans and was made publicly available
but remained copyrighted).

                                Fote

=========================================================================
 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 address@hidden         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
=========================================================================
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;