View Single Post
Old 22nd May 2014
censored censored is offline
Swen Tnavelerri
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 45
Default On related note

On a related note, we should consider the attack against the idea of the API as being outside of the scope of copyright. Google just lost against Oracle on that basis. If APIs are now suddenly, in spite of thirty year old precedents, copyrightable, then the GPL automatically degenerates to the LGPL by the opinion I've seen expressed in an article I've recently read. Not that it matters. Again, I'm not a lawyer, so disregard all.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more trade press about the API brouhaha. It's very serious stuff, very negative for all of us, no matter the camp we're in...

Edit: Attempts to relocate the "GPL automatically degenerates to the LGPL" article failed, and so the statement is hereby retracted. It was just my imagination, apparently.


Relative to my previous post regarding GPLv3/v2:

The kernel exception in the Linux kernel lets us use the kernel more liberally than if the exception wasn't there. But, the idea of applying exceptions to a context otherwise ruled by GPL licensing is probably more complicated than it seems, and IMO brings more FUD into the picture. It's Just easier to pick a license that fits the purpose, use it harmoniously, and forget the loopholes. I suppose that's what Apple and FreeBSD have done with the complete ejection of GNU. No more loopholes. Each to their own.

Last edited by censored; 23rd May 2014 at 10:12 PM.
Reply With Quote