Re: Will OpenSSL's license change impact us?

> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 06:51:21PM +0100, Ęvar Arnfjörš Bjarmason wrote:
>> In GPLv3 projects only, not GPLv2 projects. The paragraphs you're
>> quoting all explicitly mention v3 only, so statements like
>> "incompatible in one direction" only apply to Apache 2 && GPLv3, but
>> don't at all apply to GPLv2, which is what we're using.
>
> It's complicated.
>
> It's fair enough to say that the FSF adopts a copyright maximalist
> position, and by their interpretation, the two licenses are
> incompatible, and it doesn't matter whether the two pieces of code are
> linked staticaly, dynamically, or one calls the other over an RPC
> call.
>
> Not everyone agrees with their legal analysis.  May I suggest that we
> not play amateur lawyer on the mailing list, and try to settle this
> here?  Each distribution can make its own decision, which may be based
> on its legal advice, the local laws and legal precedents in which they
> operate, etc.  And indeed, different distributions have already come
> to different conclusions with respect to various license compatibility
> issues.  (Examples: dynamically linking GPL programs with OpenSSL
> libraries under the old license, distributing ZFS modules for Linux,
> etc.)
>
> We don't expect lawyers to debug edge cases in a compiler's code
> generation.  Programmers shouldn't try to parse edge cases in the law,
> or try to use a soldering iron, unless they have explicit training and
> expertise to do so.  :-)