Tugger the SLUGger!SLUG Mailing List Archives

Re: [chat] LGPL license w/o GPL infection


On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, invisible ink wrote:

> begin Ben Leslie quotation:
> 
> > > > As defined under copyright law. I don't know what they are for code,
> > > > exactly, but it's the ones that allow you to make copies of up to 10%
> > > > or a single chapter of a book for research purposes etc.
> > > 
> > > Pete and I were talking about this last night - how does Free Software
> > > fit into research purposes? Tough one. Raz was a great reference about
> > > this stuff whilst he was here...
> > 
> > Not sure exactly what you mean by research, if you mean uni type research
> > then a lot of things end up being GPLed by necessity. Especially in OS
> > research it is hard to avoid having some GPL code in there somewhere.
> 
> Watch out, you'll have Catie picketing the unis. ;)
> 
> wrt research, it's what happens when you *don't* accept the GPL, or when
> you're given the source without a license to modify and distribute.
> 
> You can copy sections of a book for research, republish sections of a book
> for research, etc. Thus the question about source.


Oh yeah, would help if I read things in context :>

That is a really tough thing. I would really avoid looking at source that I can't
freely* use on a project. Even with fair use it is just too hazy a line to try and
walk, sure read papers on how things were implemented or docs or whatever,ut not
the code. You don't really gain that much from the code anyway. (Unless it is for
something proprietary and then you have other problems to deal with).

Benno

*: By free I mean not GPL code if I'm working on a work project, or not commercial
code when I'm working on an Open Source project, or not other students code when I'm
working on a uni assignment.