Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!van-bc!heuvax!nheu
From: nh...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca (Norman Heu)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Question About General Public License
Message-ID: <nheu.0471@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca>
Date: 31 Jul 91 02:52:18 GMT
Organization: Private Node in Vancouver, BC, Canada
Lines: 7

A quick question.. if I release a program I write under the GNU
General Public License, must I include the source?
	-Norm

--
   //   Norman Heu
 \X/    nh...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca!nheu

 Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!wupost!rex!uflorida!mailer.cc.fsu.edu!
sun13!hudgens
From: hud...@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Hudgens)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Question About General Public License
Message-ID: <3652@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
Date: 31 Jul 91 21:38:07 GMT
References: <nheu.0471@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca>
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University
Lines: 23

In article <nheu...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca> nh...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca 
(Norman Heu) writes:
>A quick question.. if I release a program I write under the GNU
>General Public License, must I include the source?
>	-Norm

Another question on the GPL: if I release a program under the GPL, can
I call it GNU-something-or-other, or is the GNU designation "reserved"
for programs with copyright owned by the FSF?  Any opinions or
definitive answers?  (It's not an entirely hypothetical question at
the moment, though the program in question is still much too shaky to
release).

-JHH






-- 
Jim Hudgens			Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
"Nothing's for sure except DEC and VAXe .. er, death and taxes"
hud...@sun13.scri.fsu.edu	Life's a bitch, and then you graduate.

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!ai.mit.edu!tower
From: to...@ai.mit.edu (Leonard H. Tower Jr.)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Question About General Public License
Message-ID: < 9108010049.AA08864@pop-tarts>
Date: 1 Aug 91 00:49:49 GMT
References: < 3652@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
Sender: to...@prep.ai.mit.edu
Reply-To: to...@prep.ai.mit.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: Project GNU, Free Software Foundation,
    675 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA  02139, USA   +1 (617) 876-3296
Lines: 28


   Date: 31 Jul 91 21:38:07 GMT
   Organization: SCRI, Florida State University
   From: hud...@sun13.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Hudgens)
   Sender: gnu-misc-dis...@cis.ohio-state.edu

   In article < nheu...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca> nh...@heuvax.wimsey.bc.ca 
   (Norman Heu) writes:
   >A quick question.. if I release a program I write under the GNU
   >General Public License, must I include the source?
   >	-Norm

No, but you must offer to make the source available for a reasonable
distribution fee.  There are other options too.  See the GPL for
details.

   Another question on the GPL: if I release a program under the GPL, can
   I call it GNU-something-or-other, or is the GNU designation "reserved"
   for programs with copyright owned by the FSF?  Any opinions or
   definitive answers?  (It's not an entirely hypothetical question at
   the moment, though the program in question is still much too shaky to
   release).

FSF and the GNU Project request that you ask us (via
g...@prep.ai.mit.edu) before designating a program as "GNU"
something-or-other.  It's the right thing to do and will avoid a lot
of confusion later on.

thanx -len

Path: gmdzi!unido!fauern!ira.uka.de!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!
oliveb!veritas!amdcad!sono!porky!mayer
From: mayer@sono.uucp (Ronald &)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Question About General Public License
Message-ID: < MAYER.91Aug6172109@porky.sono.uucp>
Date: 7 Aug 91 00:21:09 GMT
Sender: mayer@sono.uucp (Ronald Mayer)
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California
Lines: 23


someone wrote:
>   FSF and the GNU Project request that you ask us (via
>   g...@prep.ai.mit.edu) before designating a program as "GNU"
>   something-or-other.  It's the right thing to do and will avoid a lot
>   of confusion later on.

Is this really different from AT&T and Apple requesting that we ask
them before using windows and/or mice?  This would also avoid
confusion; and it's up to lawyers to define 'right thing to do'.  Is
the difference that FSF is "requesting" while the other guys are
"demanding"?

It seems that if the FSF starts claiming the phrase 'gnu' perhaps AT&T
will start claiming other phrases in the names of programs, like
'cat', 'tar', 'awk', etc...; and it would end up causing great
confusion if 'gawk' had to be renamed because it has the phrase 'awk'
in it.

    Ron

Hmm...,
 Do you think I can PATENT the idea of programs with vowels in their name :-)
 

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!olivea!oliveb!veritas!amdcad!sono!morgana!al
From: al@morgana.uucp (Al Petrofsky)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Question About General Public License
Message-ID: < AL.91Aug6182051@morgana.uucp>
Date: 7 Aug 91 01:20:51 GMT
References: < MAYER.91Aug6172109@porky.sono.uucp>
Sender: al@sono.uucp (Al Petrofsky)
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California
Lines: 47
In-Reply-To: mayer@sono.uucp's message of 6 Aug 91 17:21:09


Ronald writes:
   someone wrote:
   >   FSF and the GNU Project request that you ask us (via
   >   g...@prep.ai.mit.edu) before designating a program as "GNU"
   >   something-or-other.  It's the right thing to do and will avoid a lot
   >   of confusion later on.

   Is this really different from AT&T and Apple requesting that we ask
   them before using windows and/or mice?

Yes, it's something completely different.  Windows and mice provide
functionality.  "gnu", like "AT&T" and "Apple", is just a name.

   ...it's up to lawyers to define 'right thing to do'.

No, it's up to individuals to decide the right thing for themselves to
do, and it's up to legislators (on behalf of individuals) to define
what things are wrong for anyone to do.  What's up to lawyers and the
courts is just determining exactly how the laws should be interpreted.

  Is the difference that FSF is "requesting" while the other guys are
  "demanding"?

Well, if we were comparing the names "gnu" and "AT&T", then yes: the
difference is simply that the large corporations have registered their
trademarks, and the FSF hasn't bothered.

   It seems that if the FSF starts claiming the phrase 'gnu' perhaps AT&T
   will start claiming other phrases in the names of programs, like
   'cat', 'tar', 'awk', etc...; and it would end up causing great
   confusion if 'gawk' had to be renamed because it has the phrase 'awk'
   in it.

First of all, I think AT&T long ago agreed not to claim these names,
or POSIX would never have used them.

Also, "gnu" is used to describe a suite of programs, and is
therefore more on a par with, say, "BSD" than "cat", or other
individual program names.

   Ron

--
Al Petrofsky
sono!a...@sun.com (through August 9)
alpe...@ocf.berkeley.edu

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO v IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/