Excerpts from Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez's message of 2017-03-30 05:08:24 +0200: > On 30/03/17 03:11, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Excerpts from Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez's message of 2017-03-30 02:49:04 > > +0200: > >> On 30/03/17 00:24, Philipp Kern wrote: > >>> On 03/29/2017 11:10 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > >>>> So, the best case situation (IMHO) would be that a lawyer tell us that > >>>> Apache 2.0 is also compatible with GPLv2-only, and that we stop playing > >>>> the game of being amateur lawyers instead of software developers. > >>> > >>> But that's not how the law works in the US. Without actual litigation > >>> and precedent, the most you'll get is a risk assessment of getting sued > >>> and your likelihood of winning if so. :) > >>> > >>> Kind regards and IANAL > >>> Philipp Kern > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Right. That is how it also works in Spain, and I suspect that in many > >> other countries work the same way. > >> > >> I understand that Debian wants to take a position of zero (or minimal) > >> risk, and I also understand the desire to respect the interpretation of > >> the FSF about the GPL (they don't think this two licenses are compatibles). > >> > > > > I believe that this is a fundamental difference between RedHat and Debian. > > > > RedHat is going to do everything within the law and inside their values > > for a profit. Their values don't include a strict adherence to the wishes > > of copyright holders, but strict adherence to the law. > > > > But our values do include respect for copyright holder rights. So while > > we can probably get away with this legally, it's been decided (a few > > times?) that without the GPL licensor's consent, we can't in good faith > > produce a combination of OpenSSL and a GPL program. > > > > Just a simple question: > > Do you (or anyone else) _really_ think the copyright holders of the GPL > program in question had any intention ever of not allowing their program > to be used along with OpenSSL, when they where the ones implementing > support for using it on the first place?
Of course not! Personally I believe implementing an OpenSSL interface is a de facto exception grant.
