[KLUG Members] Nmap 3.50 Press Release

[Robert G. Brown]

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:48:17 -0500, Adam Williams wrote:

>> Checkout the fifth bullet under CHANGES...
>> http://www.insecure.org/stf/Nmap-3.50-Release.html
>See!  The GPL does contain clauses for *protecting* intellectual
>property;  just depends on who you believe it needs to be protected
>*from*.

OK, I've read the press release, and I've read the GPL (a number of
times), specifically section 4, just now. Here's the text:

4.  You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program 
    except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt 
    otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program 
    is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this 
    License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, 
    from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated 
    so long as such parties remain in full compliance.

I don't understand the connection between this section and any action
claimed by insecure.org...

1. The GPL is not selective (in fact, selectivity is a show-stopper 
   as far as OSF-compliance is concerned). Insecire.org can't state,
   in essence, "This is GPL'ed software, EXCEPT for SCO"; either it's
   GPL'ed or it isn't.

2. Insecure.org soes not claim a GPL violation here. Actually, no one
   has claimed that SCO has itself violated the GPL. It is SCO who
   claims that others (IBM, et al) has violated several licences, in-
   cluding (possibly) the GPL, and contaminating GPL'ed software in
   the process.

3. Since Insecure.org has not claimed a violation of the GPL (they 
   claim no such violation in the press release, at least) the 
   "automatic" provision described in section 4 does not take effect.

So either Insecure.org is out of bounds here, or things have happened 
which are not mentioned in the press release. If someone can explain
this gap it would certainly help.
							Regards,
							---> RGB <---