Re: lynx-dev Re: [CHRPM] lynx-2.8.5-0.11mdk.dev.8

[Doug Kaufman]

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, David Woolley wrote:

(quoting me)
> > If there is no one ready and able to enforce the GPL for lynx, then
> > it is a matter for conscience and ethics rather than law. With the
>
> No.  The problem is that any one of the copyright owners can block
> an exception, in respect of their code, forcing a rewrite of that
> code, even though you need all of them to permit one.  The copyright

I don't disagree with this. I was simply suggesting that if it is
unlikely that any of the copyright holders would object to making an
exception, that acting as if there were an exception is reasonable
(in the case where it is impossible to have a formal exception made).
If one of the copyright holders were to object, then the binary would
have to be withdrawn. There wouldn't have to be any rewriting of code,
since we are only talking about linking with a library which has a
different license, not about including code of uncertain compatibility
in the lynx code itself. If you meant rewriting lynx to exclude
code written by the objecting copyright owner, so that lynx could
still be linked with a library such as openssl, that would be quite
difficult, except in the case of someone who only contributed a small,
well-defined bit of code.
                       Doug
__
Doug Kaufman
Internet: address@hidden


; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden