Re: [boost] Re: TR1 library extensions in libstdc++ - SmartPtr

From: Ben Hutchings (ben.hutchings_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-13 05:33:05

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
> [...]
> 
>>libstdc++ is not solely distributed under the GNU GPL - if it was, every
>>program built with it would have to be distributed under GPL as well.
> 
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Nonsense (if you mean distribution of "copies" [17 USC 101]; not 
> licensing exclusive rights to original and derivative "works"... 
> which must be done under the terms of the GPL and only the GPL;
> compilation-vs-derivative distinction aside for a moment). Being 
> a mere copyright license (not a contract), the GPL can't override 
> the first sale [17 USC 109].

You are surely aware that your idea of what requires a licence (and on 
which the GPL can therefore place conditions) is unusual and does not 
agree with the intent of most of those distributing under the GPL.  I've 
stated what I believe to be the case and I don't wish to argue it with 
you.  Those who are being asked to give permission for inclusion in 
libstdc++ can make up their own minds.

Now that I think about it, I seem to remember that contributions to GCC 
(of which libstdc++ is part) must have their copyright assigned to the 
FSF.  If this is correct, it would not be sufficient for copyright 
holders to give permission for relicencing.  Can you check this, Jonathan?