Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Throwing a curve ball

Author:Eric Kidd
Posted:9/9/2000; 12:16:13 AM
Topic:Guido and Richard
Msg #:21049 (In response to 21039)
Prev/Next:21048 / 21050

Eric, it might be possible to route around all this silliness in software by creating a DLL-type interface that allows apps to bind to scripting languages at runtime.

Yes and no. ;-)

First of all, do you really want to "route around" another programmer's licensing terms? As a programmer, I want to respect those terms, even when I think they're silly.

But, yes, your suggestion has been tried before. It's been done in good faith, but it's also been done with the intent of screwing certain developers.

Unless it mentions something about runtime binding, but who the hell is Stallman going to sue?

Stallman can only sue people who copy his code in violation of his license. And since the US copyright system is heavily biased in favor of authors, he'll probably win.

Another Way to Look at It

Stallman is just another commercial, proprietary software developer with a really weird license. I have to obey Stallman's terms for using GCC, just like I have to obey your terms for using Frontier.

If I pay you money for Frontier, I can run a copy on my server, and I can write UserTalk scripts. On the other hand, I can't distribute copies of Frontier, or republish the scripts in your ODB.

GCC is similar. If I download a copy of GCC, I can use it to compile C programs. I can make copies of GCC for my friends. I can even create new versions of GCC. But I can't place any further restrictions on the copies I make, even if I add some new code of my own.

Both licenses give me certain rights. Both licenses deny me other rights. And in my opinion, both licenses are honorable, fair and reasonable.

Cheers,
Eric

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:35 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.