Using OpenSource software in closed source componies (how ?)

[Shlomi Fish]

On Friday 20 Nov 2009 01:21:29 guy keren wrote:
> Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > On Friday 20 Nov 2009 00:18:03 Boris shtrasman wrote:
> >> Well my question arises after reading nmap copy file: (
> >> http://nmap.org/svn/COPYING)
> >>
> >>  * o Integrates source code from Nmap
> >>  * * o Reads or includes Nmap copyrighted data files, such as
> >>   * *   nmap-os-db or nmap-service-probes.
> >>    * * o Executes Nmap and parses the results (as opposed to typical
> >> shell or  * *   execution-menu apps, which simply display raw Nmap
> >> output and so are  * *   not derivative works.)
> >>        * * o Integrates/includes/aggregates Nmap into a proprietary
> >>  executable     * *   installer, such as those produced by
> >> InstallShield. * * o Links to a library or executes a program that does
> >> any of the above   * *
> >>                      *
> >
> > Wow! That seems like a gross mis-interpretation of what a derivative work
> > means, and I don't think the FSF supports it to this exterme extent. A
> > software which poses such restrictions may possibly not be free. The nmap
> > originators cannot make claim for programs that executes nmap and parses
> > its results (as long as the parsing code is 100% original), because this
> > is not linking and so is not considered derivative works according to the
> > traditional FSF interpretation.
> >
> > Of course, once nmap has made its software GPLed, there's little they can
> > do to stop the devil from escaping. They can give their own absurd
> > interpretation of the GPL or what "derivative works" mean, but I believe
> > the law is on the side of my interpretation.
> 
> the thing is - they write that their software is distributed under the
> terms of the GPL _with a list of exceptions and clarifications_ - which
> means they are using a modified version of the GPL. in this case, the
> interpretation of the FSF has nothing to do with nmap's license.
> 

In that case:

1. The licensing terms of nmap are not free-as-in-speech.

2. It may well be a violation of the licence of the text of the GPL itself. 
The text of the GPL is copyrighted under a restrictive licence, and I'm not 
sure it allows people modify it or add "interpretative" clauses to its 
beginning like that.

How sad. Seems like nmap is on the Free Software Directory:

http://directory.fsf.org/project/nmap/

The entry was last updated in 2005. I may have to contact the Free Software 
Directory maintainers about it and see what they say.

> and of-course, nmaps license has no bearing on the interpretation of a
> non-modified GPL license.
>

Right.

Regards,

	Shlomi Fish

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish       http://www.shlomifish.org/
Parody on "The Fountainhead" - http://shlom.in/towtf

Chuck Norris read the entire English Wikipedia in 24 hours. Twice.