From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31015 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2010 21:13:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 31004 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Aug 2010 21:13:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-qy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.216.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:13:36 +0000 Received: by qyk12 with SMTP id 12so4419465qyk.0 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:13:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.236.213 with SMTP id kl21mr5334033qcb.120.1282684414813; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.217.70 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:13:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <215382.96867.qm@web112514.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4C64D224.1030001@adacore.com> <350785.50982.qm@web112515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <53EE6DB2F971468D9FEEC38287F36875@igor> <4C65560E.2060001@adacore.com> <4C657043.3020206@adacore.com> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:13:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: generic query regarding GPL and licensing terms associated with gdb From: Steffen Dettmer To: gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2 On Fri, Aug 13, Martin Schr=F6der wrote: >> If you take GPL code, modify it by adding trade secrets, >> and then distribute it without giving a GPL license, it >> is not the case that somehow you have lost the trade >> secrets, or that anyone is free to disclose them. That >> is not at all the case. > I concur with Tom Tromey: If in doubt, ask the FSF. It's just > that I don't see how I could doubt the legitimacy of talking > about code that is correctly and willingly licensed to you > under GPL terms. did someone asked FSF and if so, could you please tell the result? As I understood, one of the most essential key points of GPL is exactly that it is not possible to licence code under terms of GPL and redistribute any derived work without offering this derived work also under the terms of the GPL. So I think "take GPL code, modify it [...] and then distribute it without giving a GPL license" simply is not allowed at all. Could someone please clarify? oki, Steffen