Re: lynx-dev http://www.slcc.edu/lynx/

[David Woolley]

> 
> Wait, the issue is really the US' not letting high security software be 
> exported under normal circumstances, not software patents.
> 

This is a common misunderstanding.  It is both.  RSA is covered by a patent
in the USA.  That patent requires royalties for commercial use.  Lynx
is licensed under the GPL.  That licence doesn't permit redistribution if
any class of user would have to pay patent royalties.  Any copy of SSL
Lynx received in the USA is a pirate copy, certainly because the GPL is
void and there is no other licence, and, for commercial users, because
it is in breach of the RSA patent.

Any US patent legal copy of Lynx is pirate software in the rest of the
world because it is in breach of the copyright on RSAREF.  The exporter
is probably also guilty of a criminal offence, because of the export
controls.

Changing this to permit redistribution for non-commercial use would
require all copyright owners (or their estates?) to consent, or
would require the removal of code written by those who don't consent.
A change could be made by replacing the GPL or by parallel licensing
under alternative terms.

IANAL