On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:36:17AM +0100, Pavel Kankovsky wrote: > In fact, I could take a report, replace all the "copyrighted strings" with > references to Nessus plugins (e.g. 7th string in blabla.nasl, revision > 1.23), and give it to anyone together with a GPLed program including the > source code of those plugins and reassembling the original text of the > report. Agreed. Then you won't be distributing the report itself and the guy who will use your program to re-assemble the report will still end up with a text file whose ownership is undefined at this time. [...] > The second choice might make some sense for plugins where the wording of > the output makes a substantial part of their "value". The program is > GPLed, ergo its output, as a derived work of the code, should be GPLed as > well. Of course, the application of GPL to a piece of text is somewhat > tricky but it is possible: No that's why GNU came up with the GNU FDL. The GPL covers things such as linking, binary distribution and other stuff that don't apply to a text file, which is why I started the issue initially and why I just want to clarify what people can and can not do on a Nessus report (ie: remove authorship info and add "Here is what I found"). I asked an intellectual propery lawyer to look at this issue, we will see what he comes up with. -- Renaud _______________________________________________ Plugins-writers mailing list Plugins-writers@private http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/plugins-writers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Dec 16 2003 - 17:02:55 PST