On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:55 PM Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote:
> So basically you want to add OpenSSL to Sage and then say > > "We know that distributing SageMath might be illegal, but it is unlikely > that somebody will sue. Use at your own risk!" > > I doubt that this is such a good deal. The choice for users installing the Sage binary is between: (a) using a broken version of the Python/R/Sage stack that exposes them to installing malware, or (b) using a more robust version of the Python/R/Sage stack, but with the risk that somebodywho owns the copyright of some GPL'd part of the Sage distribution sues the distributor of Sage for violating their GPL license. A copyright holder that might have a valid complaint would not be OpenSSL, since it's not the OpenSSL license that is violated; it's the GPL that is violated. Honestly, it's never even been clear to me that the GPL is definitely violated here, since OpenSSL only binary links with Python, and Python is not GPL'd. The meaning of derived work for software that is combined only at runtime via an interpreter environment is still unclear to me (e.g., see recent inclusion of ZFS in Ubuntu). The organizations doing the distribution of the Sage binaries would probably be taking the biggest risk here. William -- -- William Stein -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
