Re: [GPL] No linking with proprietary programs: where?
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 07:13:55PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 04:21:18PM +0100, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > >
> > > That said, I think we can all pretty well agree that copying code verbatim
> > > from or into the body of a program's source code is covered by the GPL and
> > > that this discussion can safely end here. I'm tired of hearing about it.
> >
> > If tehy made headers public domain, would it resolve problem ?
>
> If you look at it from a very weird angle it may look like it. Maybe it will
> solve the legal problems if you are careful at not distributing the
> executable (which is not executable any more :) with the library objects.
>
> First, if you distribute them together, the situation is quite clear, as the
> work as a whole includes the libraries.
>
> However, even if you don't, you can make the point that the work as a whole
> includes the libraries anyway, as the executable will be useless without
> them.
>
> If you can provide a functional and free stub library, perhaps with limited
> functionality, it is much simpler (because now you can ship this). I think
> this was done with libreadline (or planned at least).
Does copyright law see any difference between shared library linking and
pipe/corba/socket linking ?
Does copyright law see any difference between calling library, when it is
.so object/kernel module/kernel buildin ?
Reply to: