SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [chat] LGPL license w/o GPL infection
- To: slug-chat@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [chat] LGPL license w/o GPL infection
- From: Ben Leslie <benjl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon Oct 15 13:14:02 2001
- Organization: SES Group
- Reply-to: benno@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Mutt/1.3.20i
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Mary Gardiner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 11:41:35AM +1000, Ben Leslie wrote:
> > 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.
> It generally is uni type research.
<snip a bunch of correct and relevant stuff :>
> Anyway, I'm surprised that, for example, publishing a thesis that
> comprises in part code that incorporates GPLed code requires GPLing all
> the code. But then, I'm not sure where producing a thesis diverges from
> publishing a book.
The thesis itself does not have to be GPLed. The code produced for the thesis
does. The submittable and important part of the thesis is the write up
not the implementation. There is no problem basing a thesis on existing
GPL code, this isn't plagiarism or anything such as this. You only have a problem
when you try and pass of some work as your own, as long as you attribute your work
then you *don't* have a problem. (Well you might if you didn't actually
do any work and have to attribute it all - but that is another point entirely).