osOpinion: Loophole in the GPL?

[ Thanks to Kelly McNeill for this link. ]

"The following hypothetical is a possible way that an unscrupulous company can bypass the restrictions of the general public license (GPL). I'd love to hear from anyone that can find a flaw in the argument."

"Let's assume that Acme software takes a GPL Neural Network program and starts working on a modified, improved version. Acme intends to make money from its software."

"Next, new employees of Acme are asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) preventing them from discussing the new program or, in particular, publishing, redistributing or releasing the work before the company's embargo release date."

"You can probably see where I'm going with this line of thought, but allow me to go on."

Complete Story

Related Stories:

• Paul Ferris: Assimilate! The Case for a GPL'd Java(Nov 08, 2000)
• KT.Linuxcare.com: Possible GPL Violations In Kernel Source(Nov 06, 2000)
• NewsForge.com: Sneak preview of GPL v. 3: The business-friendly version(Nov 03, 2000)
• Python 1.6 GPL incompatible?(Sep 07, 2000)
• Stallman on Qt, the GPL, KDE, and GNOME(Sep 05, 2000)
• osOpinion: To GPL or Not To GPL(Sep 04, 2000)
• osOpinion: Why BSD is more free than GPL is(Dec 29, 1999)
• id Software releases Quake 1 source code under the GPL(Dec 22, 1999)
• DoomWorld: Doom Source Now GPL(Oct 03, 1999)
• 3Com.com: Linux (GPL) Drivers for Network Interface Cards(Sep 14, 1999)
• Toward the Encouragement of Copyleft and the GPL(Jun 10, 1999)