[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANWtx02r_h+1GB8XEyqKzAq_xQUzAcdFEjD=J78Q=PP2qf1BCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 19:37:26 -0400
From: Rich Rumble <richrumble@...il.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: GPL license is not free at all
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Milen Rangelov <gat3way@...il.com> wrote:
> I still think the better solution is "GPL+unrar exception". I really
> wouldn't believe someone would grab a password cracker and turn it into an
> archiver. It could basically do it with either unrar code or say the clamav
> port. That's just insane.
That part bugs me too, the license is only telling you something you
SHOULD know already, not to reverse(engineer?) the
patented/copyrighted Rar archiver by using the "free" unrar code, and
then distributing that work. I'm sure RMS and the FSF would not agree,
it's one extreme or the other, just cause it says you can't reverse
the proprietary algo means it's not free... extreme.
-rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
