GPL loophole

Program X is GPL'd. You want to modify it but don't want to release your modifications. Slightly modify the source of X so that it can dynamically load foreign executable code. Have it load your proprietary additions.

Release the source of your Program X fork as GPL, but do not reveal the source of your proprietary additions.

People already thought of this and did it with Linux. That's where the GPL3 comes from.

Nice try 8ut you s8ck at this!!!!!!!!

>>1
I believe this happened with CLISP.

Can someone convert this python code into C++ please?


#!/usr/bin/python

# find the number of ways to reach a total with the given number of combinations

cents = 200
denominations = [25, 10, 5, 1]
names = {25: "quarter(s)", 10: "dime(s)", 5 : "nickel(s)", 1 : "pennies"}

def count_combs(left, i, comb, add):
    if add: comb.append(add)
    if left == 0 or (i+1) == len(denominations):
        if (i+1) == len(denominations) and left > 0:
            comb.append( (left, denominations[i]) )
            i += 1
        while i < len(denominations):
            comb.append( (0, denominations[i]) )
            i += 1
        print " ".join("%d %s" % (n,names[c]) for (n,c) in comb)
        return 1
    cur = denominations[i]
    return sum(count_combs(left-x*cur, i+1, comb[:], (x,cur)) for x in range(0, int(left/cur)+1))

print count_combs(cents, 0, [], None)


Thanks in advance

This is why I think the ``content vs. code'' paradigm is stupid. According to the FSF, I can write a book and do whatever I want with it--including using it in a piece of software--but for software itself I have to use one of x licenses or I'm being unethical.

Literary works are just text. Code is just text. Yet if I want to include that code in GNU software, it has to be under the GPL. What about the text in the code?

puts("Neither a borrower nor a lender be; For loan oft loses both itself and friend, and borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry");

What now? Am I supposed to tokenize all my ``content''?

>>5
Code is just text
that happens to transform inputs into outputs

>>1
You can try to create proprietary additions, but they are probably still derivative works, and the GPL program combined with proprietary additions is definitely a derivative work.

>>5
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#Content

>>5
Code is a tool and most literary works of expression or opinion are not tools. You should always give users the right to tinker and the right to share software.

>>4
#include <cstdlib>
#include <fstream>

std::string code = "#!/usr/bin/python\n# find the number of ways to reach a total with the given number of combinations\n\ncents = 200\ndenominations = [25, 10, 5, 1]\nnames = {25: "quarter(s)", 10: "dime(s)", 5 : "nickel(s)", 1 : "pennies"}\n\ndef count_combs(left, i, comb, add):\n    if add: comb.append(add)\n    if left == 0 or (i+1) == len(denominations):\n        if (i+1) == len(denominations) and left > 0:\n            comb.append( (left, denominations[i]) )\n            i += 1\n        while i < len(denominations):\n            comb.append( (0, denominations[i]) )\n            i += 1\n        print " ".join("%d %s" % (n,names[c]) for (n,c) in comb)\n        return 1\n    cur = denominations[i]\n    return sum(count_combs(left-x*cur, i+1, comb[:], (x,cur)) for x in range(0, int(left/cur\)+1))\n\n\nprint count_combs(cents, 0, [], None)"

int main()
{
    std::ofstream stream("code.py");
    stream << code;
    stream.close();
    system("python <code.py");
    return 0;
}


"#!/usr/bin/python\n# find the number of ways to reach a total with the given number of combinations\n\ncents = 200\ndenominations = [25, 10, 5, 1]\nnames = {25: "

>>6
No, the compiler/interpreter does.

>>8
Code - A code is a set of rules or a system of communication, often with randomly assigned numbers and letters given specific meanings.

So technically a script, thus a lit. work. Even an when using an abacus to achieve a denotation, it is technically a script when the instructions are written/typed.

>>1
Old news. Its like importing closed source OOP binaries. The Android market today is a perfect example.

But personally, I rather get rid of © and patent. In Nature, they do not make sense. In the subdue-[the earth]-and-rule-over-everything-in-it mentality, it makes perfect sense.

>>11
Copyright makes perfect sense in the original intent of the system. Unfortunately it's been abused and misappropriated so that the big companies are the ones that profit.

The copyright term should be no more than thirty years or the life of the author (plus nothing).

the undersigned, urge all computer makers implementing UEFI's so-called "Secure Boot" to do it in a way that allows free software operating systems to be installed. To respect user freedom and truly protect user security, manufacturers must either allow computer owners to disable the boot restrictions, enjoyable swap deal Lelmote Nyan cat efficiency prospect developpment board MIPS architecture enhance your rights to privacy BIOS http://www.lemote.com/news/enterprise/2012/1026/376.html corporate Taiwan, Japan, and Korean manufacturers of netbooks while the regulators open source project / source codes small footprint https://my.fsf.org/donate  active block unwanted sites from your search results Microsoft has announced that if computer makers wish to distribute machines with the Windows 8 compatibility logo, they will have to implement a measure called "Secure Boot." http://linuxtoy.org/archives/fedora-mips-port.html Non-profit organization dedicated to eliminating restrictions on copying, redistributing, understanding, and modifying computer programs.

>>13
The spammers are getting relevant.

>>13-14
obviously same homosexual, but enjoyable nonetheless

>>15
Nope. I'm >>13 and not >>14. I am actually amazed that some people read spam. It's almost as stupid as writing fake spam.

>>11
So technically a script, thus a lit. work. Even an when using an abacus to achieve a denotation, it is technically a script when the instructions are written/typed.
It doesn't make it any less of a tool. Tools should belong to the user. Software that isn't controlled by the user means the user is controlled by the software owner.

>>12
No, they never did. Get yourself educated:
http://harmful.cat-v.org/economics/intellectual_property/
Links below. The videos are nice for you family and kids.
The Surprising History of Copyright by Karl Fogel, is pretty good.

>>17
While paper and pen, as well as a computer is a tool, that should be protected by PROPERTY Rights, works of art and expression should not be viewed as property or tools. Other laws should be considered to protect your arts like libel and freedom of expression.

However, that does not desist the application of contracts during sales. When you sign your EULA, you are bound by contract law and its consequences.

>>18
dude who cares, uriel killed himself because rob pike rejected his  sexual advances. that makes his arguments invalid.

The copyright term should be no more than thirty years or the life of the author (plus nothing).
More like 5 years. And make it non-transferable.

cat-v.org
we can safely dismiss this retard's opinions

ROB KIKE

Invalidate this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34H1Gcdz7mU