Apple, iPhone, and GPLv3 troubles

Chris Lattner
Fri Sep 26 06:31:00 GMT 2008

On Sep 25, 2008, at 3:11 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

>>> This means that you couldn't use *GCC* if you
>>> did something the FSF found objectionable, closing an easy
>>> work-around.
>> This doesn't work, because it breaks out of the basic framework of
>> copyright law.  Nobody signs anything or accepts any terms in order  
>> to
>> use gcc.  The FSF wants to stop people from distributing proprietary
>> binary plugins to gcc.  The copyright on gcc does not apply to those
>> plugins.
> Also, even if you could develop a license similar to the GPL but  
> with an
> additional restriction to this end, this would not be the GPL anymore,
> because GPLv3 limits the "non-permissive additional terms" to the ones
> listed in Section 7:

The FSF could certainly define a new "GPL4" or "GPL3.1" or whatever,  
that contained any wording they want.  However, this whole discussion  
is off topic for this list, I'm sorry I've propagated it this far!


More information about the Gcc mailing list