On 03:58 21/04/04, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
"... (Your modifications, if they can stand on their own as a separate entity, may be released any way you like, but the combination of them with GPC may only be released under the terms of the GNU GPL.)"
``Separate entity'' is rather vague; do you mean that it can run standalone, or do you mean that it does not contain code from any GPL-covered software? Both have to be true before you can consider releasing it under any license other than GPL.
"*Your* modifications" means to me that they're really yours, i.e. don't contain code from any GPL-covered software or anything else for that matter.
You can not modify something that that wasn't already there. This is akin to the phrase ``new and improved''; how can you improve something that didn't exist before?
Case in point, ``your modifications'' does not neccessarily have to mean that the lines of code you inserted/added aren't protected by the GPL. Removal of lines, of course, is a no-brainer: the new codebase would obviously still have to be under the GPL.
But if we're going to do that, we'd also have to note that whether or not you'd have to use a GPL-compatible license depends on whether or not your entirely-new-files link with the whole distro (in which case it HAS to be released under a GPL-compatible license), or is designed to be used separately (in which case it can be proprietary).
In my latest I wrote "When you modify a free program released under the GNU General Public License, e.g. the GNU Pascal compiler itself: [...]", so I think it's clear (*modifying* a free program; also, changes to GPC itself will always link to GPL code). But if deemed necessary, I can also address this issue specially.
That about covers that part, Frank; when I wrote this message, I don't think you've written your reply yet (or I just haven't received it yet). Add to that the fact that I forgot to change the To: field (again).