Re: [libesmtp-devel] Licence issues for libESMTP (and Balsa) - long (was Re: NTLM authentication)

[Matthias Andree <ma+balsa dt e-technik uni-dortmund de>]

On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Ali Akcaagac wrote:

> On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 15:13, Matthias Andree wrote:
> > > it's a known fact that a lot of 3rd party applications programmers,
> > > either KDE, BALSA, EVOLUTION and whatever else seem to have this
> > > problem, i don't get it why that guy doesn't simplify his licensing
> > > modells.
> > 
> > He wrote it, he chooses the license. Remember, there is no natural right
> > to use somebody else's code in your application. Unless it's GPLd and
> > your application is, but then that's a special copyleft license crafted
> > for this purpose.
> 
> right, but....
> 
> - his packages compiles and links against GPL'ed software and libraries.

That's the sole point.

> - his packages use GPL'ed software to create makefiles and other crap.

"Automake places no restrictions on the distribution of the resulting
`Makefile.in's.  We still encourage software authors to distribute their
work under terms like those of the GPL, but doing so is not required to
use Automake."

> - he probably uses GPL'ed software to write his stuff.

Similar terms as to automake also apply to GNU make and GNU gcc.

If his packages really link against GPL stuff, then a friendly hint to
open OpenSSL to GPL software should do the job, if the OpenSSL guys fail
to comply, they can - for the USA, at least - be forced to with a
lawsuit aimed at fulfilling the license, or a copyright infringement
suit. But that's step #2 or #3.