Re: Unidentified subject!
email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > "Dynamic linking of this program or any derivative thereof to any
> > library no matter how licensed is permitted without loss of any of
> > the rights granted by the GPL."
> Yup, because it is perfectly clear that "this program" does not
> include the library. It can't: the author doesn't own the library, nor
> is it present among the documents to which he is licensing.
You're not thinking about the end user here. The GPL grants the end
user the right to modify any part of the running program. I'd prefer
a licensing clause that doesn't introduce any conflicts for anyone.
Consider also the case of a KDE author who also works for Troll Tech.
How clear is it, in this case, that the author doesn't own the library?
Introducing legal impossibilities and hoping that people draw the
"obvious" conclusion isn't a good way of writing a license.