A few comments

[Ethan Blanton]

Eion Robb spake unto us the following wisdom:
> The GPL FAQ seems to suggest that something in a different process does  
> indeed count as a different program
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins
> <quote>
> If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the  
> requirements for the licenses of a plug-in?
> It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. If the program uses  
> fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs,  
> so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them.
> </quote>

This addresses an entirely different issue; that is, plugins which are
out-of-process and share no code with the parent.

> Wasn't there a fork of Pidgin somewhere that did do this so that plugins  
> could be closed source?  I would consider that more of a GPL 'spirt'  
> violation thing.

Proteus uses a similar circumvention of the GPL in technicality only,
on OSX.

> Would "send offline message" count as a remote method invocation?

Not necessarily, it depends on the methods used.  As discussed
elsewhere in this thread (or perhaps somewhere in the Pidgin
development channels), this boils down to the difference between a
"service" and an "API".  For example, it is pretty clear that SMTP is
a service, but that a Java RMI interface is an API.  Both of these
look similar from a communications standpoint, but are very different
from a programmer's point of view.  There is a gradient from one to
the other, and at some point the "service" turns into an "API".  My
argument is that the Skype API is closer to the API end than the
service end.

> >And I am not happy with this obvious circumvention of the intent of
> >the GPL.  As long as no one is happy...  :-P
>
> I get the feeling that a legal opinion (from a real lawyer, no less)  
> wouldn't sway you? :) 'Intent' is a tricky one to put on paper or indeed,  
> into a legal document; something that the GPLv3 tries to address.

A legal opinion from a lawyer might convince me that this is not a GPL
violation, but it would certainly not make me *happy*, and in fact I
would be more than slightly disappointed if it led to a weakening of
the GPL.

> Fair enough.  I'm not wanting to upset or make anyone uncomfortable anyone  
> over a bit of code.  I'm happy to take my code elsewhere if there was  
> consensus (how would that happen btw... is there some kind of voting thing  
> that happens?), or if lawyers found it to be illegal.  I'm still happy to  
> plod away at improving Pidgin/libpurple -- as long as its not too  
> 'immoral' of me to try to combine IM's with chat's :)

No; any improvements to the Pidgin base of other types are more than
welcome.  I do not even object at all to the fact that you want a
Skype plugin, I merely object to the Skype terms of service being laid
on Pidgin users.

Ethan

-- 
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy
for evils].  They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor
determined to commit crimes.
		-- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/attachments/20071017/f50d1c3b/attachment.sig>