Subject: Re: [openip] Re: GNU License for Hardware
From: Bernard Lang <>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 15:54:53 +0200

On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 01:32:34PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> I'm happy with your distinction, personally, but there are a lot of
> unhappy BSD developers out there (and Mr. Metzger, for those following
> that thread) who will claim that this is a restriction on their
> freedom.  I agree, but see no point in complaining, since I tend to
> accept[1] intellectual property---I don't see the GPL as "cracking"
> copyright, as many do, but rather as a wonderful "hack" extending the
> use of copyright to protecting authors' desires to use their works to
> improve the world around them.

> Footnotes:
> [1]  Not necessarily as currently defined in law.  For example, I
> believe in the right of authors to demand correct attribution of their
> works as a bare minimum.  I don't know whether any other specific
> provisions of copyright or patent law are ethically justifiable without
> reference to "the good of society," since eliminating an intellectual
> property right does not harm any person's ability to directly use that
> intellectual asset, just their ability to make money by licensing it
> to others.  I'm of two minds on that distinction....

The main difference between copyright and "droit d'auteur" (european
counterpart) is that one cannot give up or sell his moral rights, such
as one's name as the author. So if the GPL required abandonning such a
right, it would be illegal in France (I know it does not).

--             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
            INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
         Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion