> Openssl comes with the Cygwin operating system and is probably OK > under the GPL. Wget, whose copyright is held by the FSF, recently
What's being argued here is that it is a "normal part of the operating system", and therefore could even be fully closed source. But the implication is that, in any situation where it is not supplied with the OS, it cannot be supplied with Lynx. > for all platforms. This probably isn't possible with lynx, since > the copyright isn't held by any one entity. Similarly, there is > no one other than a copyright owner who can enforce the GPL. See > "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html"; This inability to effectively enforce the licence or vary it is why the FSF wanted to insist on a single copryright owner for Lynx before distributing it from their site. The current copyright ownership status for Lynx means its impossible to make exceptions to the licence, e.g. to invoke the rule that allows versions to be restricted from distribution to countries where there is a patent conflict. I have a horrible feeling that is is not even possible to establish who has copyrights on what in Lynx. > Since the openssl license is not technically compatible with GPL, That's a serious problem for Lynx. > and since the openssl developers have no intention of changing their > license, I believe it would be reasonable to act in accord with what > you think the intent of the lynx developers would be in this regard. I think that the FSF would take a dim view of this, as the whole basis of enforcement of the GPL is to make people fear legal action if they breach the rules; they wouldn't want precedents for "I thought he wouldn't object" arguments. ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
