Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!cs.utexas.edu!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod
From: zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: The GNU Public License
Summary: royalties & contracts
Message-ID: <768@madnix.UUCP>
Date: 3 Aug 89 10:32:11 GMT
References:  <26@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> <208@argosy.UUCP>
Organization: MADNIX, operated by: ARP Software  Madison WI
Lines: 29


In article <208@argosy.UUCP>, doug@argosy.UUCP (Doug Hoffman) writes:
 
>I find this much like saying that the hammer is used to build a house,
>and therefore you owe royalties to the manufacturer of the tool.  You
>don't even owe anything to the lumber company (assuming you paid for the
>material :-) ).  The house you build is the result of your using tools
>and material to create something.  You may pay royalties to the
>architect for each copy you build, but that is a matter of contract with
>them.
 
   If you *rented* the hammer, you have a contract with the
hammer's owner (who may or may not be the manufacturer), and that
can say pretty much anything the two of you can agree on. And if
you can't agree, you have to use a different hammer.
 
>The issue of including library code is entirely different.  That I would
>compare more to copying music.  If you play a tune which you have rights
>to on a musical instrument, no problems.  If you play that tune and
>include prerecorded backgroud, there may be a problem with the legal
>rights.  If you have included someone else's code in your program, you
>do possibly owe them something.  That is entirely dependent upon the
>contract you created in aquiring their code.
 
   An earlier question was related to whether BISON's '.skel'
file is analogous to library code. I don't know how BISON works,
so I can't comment, but I haven't seen anyone else comment on
this either.
(my apologies if you did and I missed it)