From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dewar@gnat.com
To: eager@mvista.com, jfg@sonicity.com, mark@codesourcery.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Compiler for Red Hat Linux 8
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 10:49:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010719174859.93272F2B72@nile.gnat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01371.html

<<  Unfortunately, none of us are lawyers, and few of us are even copyright
experts, so we can't really be sure.  It would be nice if the FSF would
take an official position, so that we could at least point to what the
intent of the GPL is in this respect, even if we couldn't be sure of
it's actual meaning.  (You can never be sure until you go to court.)
>>

One helpful thing to realize in such debates (even if boring :-) is that
there is really no such thing as "violating" the GPL. The GPL is a license
agreement that allows you to perform copying and creation of deriviative
works under certain limited conditions. If you copy software and the GPL
does not give you permission to do this copy, then the copyright has
been violated. The point is that it is up to you to positively show that
the GPL permits the copying.