Posted Dec 7, 2011 1:09 UTC (Wed) by ewan
In reply to: DMCA
Parent article: C|Net Download.Com accused of bundling Nmap with malware
It's GPLv2, but with some additional provisions:
No, it GPLv2 plus one exception for OpenSSL. The 'clarifications' are just information about how the authors interpret the phrase 'derived work'. Their interpretation may or may not be correct, but they're not saying that you have to accept their interpretation to get a licence, they're just telling you what it is.
I mean technically, when you run nmap on Windows, the Windows kernel is loading the nmap binary, which is an nmap-copyrighted file, and executing that binary.
You can run GPLv2 software on a proprietary OS - standard OS components are specifically exempted.
I don't think it's even possible to redefine what a "derived work" is inside your license. Isn't that a fundamental part of copyright law, defined in 17 U.S.C. § 101?
US law doesn't hold everywhere, of course, but you're right - the term means what it means, it cannot be redefined, and isn't being.
I'd have thought that the obvious GPL claim here would be that the file that CNet are distributing is clearly a derived work ('interesting' interpretations of that term not withstanding), and so they cannot distribute it unless they make the source to their malware available under the GPL as well.
to post comments)