Hi!
I have now send the following mail to the FSF (gnu@gnu.org) with the subject "legality of using closed-source programs with completly GPLd ReactOS".
Greatings theuserbl
Here the mail:
Hi!
There existing a project, which want to rewrite MS-Windows NT, which is called ReactOS. You can see the home of the project at http://www.reactos.com/
The idea is, to have an OS, which can run all MS-Windows NT programs, which can make use of > all the drivers, which exists for WinNT and so on.
But the problem is, that the complete OS is under the GPL.
The people behind the ReactOS-project don't see a problem in using closed-source programs/libraries/drivers on top of their OS.
But what do _you_ think about it?
I have now mentioned the problem ob their mailingliste at http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-general/2004-February/000736.htm...
But I think, it would be nice, to here a comment of licensing-competent people. So, what do _you_ > think about this?
Greatings theuserbl
_________________________________________________________________ E-Mails sind zu unpersönlich? Mit einer Webcam wird der MSN Messenger zum Bildtelefon! http://www.msn.de/messenger Jetzt kostenlos downloaden und mitmachen!
I can see that this project is going to need some sort of official statement about its license interpretations. I'd be glad to write something up when I get time, but if anyone wants to take a stab at it, please do.
While we're at it, we need to write down our unwritten policies about patents, copyrights, trademarks, reverse engineering, and so on.
-Vizzini
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 07:30, theUser BL wrote:
Hi!
I have now send the following mail to the FSF (gnu@gnu.org) with the subject "legality of using closed-source programs with completly GPLd ReactOS".
Greatings theuserbl
Here the mail:
Hi!
There existing a project, which want to rewrite MS-Windows NT, which is called ReactOS. You can see the home of the project at http://www.reactos.com/
The idea is, to have an OS, which can run all MS-Windows NT programs, which can make use of > all the drivers, which exists for WinNT and so on.
But the problem is, that the complete OS is under the GPL.
The people behind the ReactOS-project don't see a problem in using closed-source programs/libraries/drivers on top of their OS.
But what do _you_ think about it?
I have now mentioned the problem ob their mailingliste at http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-general/2004-February/000736.htm...
But I think, it would be nice, to here a comment of licensing-competent people. So, what do _you_ > think about this?
Greatings theuserbl
E-Mails sind zu unpersönlich? Mit einer Webcam wird der MSN Messenger zum Bildtelefon! http://www.msn.de/messenger Jetzt kostenlos downloaden und mitmachen!
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.com http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
Go into more detail.
Vizzini schrieb:
I can see that this project is going to need some sort of official statement about its license interpretations. I'd be glad to write something up when I get time, but if anyone wants to take a stab at it, please do.
While we're at it, we need to write down our unwritten policies about patents, copyrights, trademarks, reverse engineering, and so on.
-Vizzini
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 07:30, theUser BL wrote:
Hi!
I have now send the following mail to the FSF (gnu@gnu.org) with the subject "legality of using closed-source programs with completly GPLd ReactOS".
Greatings theuserbl
Here the mail:
Hi!
There existing a project, which want to rewrite MS-Windows NT, which is called ReactOS. You can see the home of the project at http://www.reactos.com/
The idea is, to have an OS, which can run all MS-Windows NT programs, which can make use of > all the drivers, which exists for WinNT and so on.
But the problem is, that the complete OS is under the GPL.
The people behind the ReactOS-project don't see a problem in using closed-source programs/libraries/drivers on top of their OS.
But what do _you_ think about it?
I have now mentioned the problem ob their mailingliste at http://reactos.com:8080/archives/public/ros-general/2004-February/000736.htm...
But I think, it would be nice, to here a comment of licensing-competent people. So, what do _you_ > think about this?
Greatings theuserbl
E-Mails sind zu unpersönlich? Mit einer Webcam wird der MSN Messenger zum Bildtelefon! http://www.msn.de/messenger Jetzt kostenlos downloaden und mitmachen!
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.com http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.com http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-general
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 17:31, Robert Köpferl wrote:
Go into more detail.
Vizzini schrieb:
I can see that this project is going to need some sort of official statement about its license interpretations. I'd be glad to write something up when I get time, but if anyone wants to take a stab at it, please do.
What I meant is that we get *lots* of licensing-related questions. We need to sit down and write up a statement about how this project is licensed. We really do need to get this stuff in shape soon.
While we're at it, we need to write down our unwritten policies about patents, copyrights, trademarks, reverse engineering, and so on.
What I meant: we have some unspoken and unwritten policies about things like reverse-engineering. Anyone who's been around for long enough has certainly knows the score. However, we get enough of these questions that someone is going to have to write something down. I'll do it when I get to it, if nobody else does first.
-Vizzini