Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org> writes:
> >> OK, say I use the X11 license. Now suppose someone installs a closed
> >> source plugin. Suppose it also happens that this same user has
> >> installed some GPL plugin. Both plugins would be allowed separately,
> >> right? When the user runs the program, it will load both plugins.
> >> Would this in some magical way make the plugins derived works of each
> >> other, thus violating the GPL?
> >
> > No. But a vendor could get into trouble if they shipped both.
>
> How's that? The GPL allows distribution together with non-GPL works,
> as long as the non-GPL things are not derived from anything GPL'd. In
> my opinion, placing two shared objects in the same tar file doesn't
> make one a derived work of the other. Would it make a difference if
> the offending (to rms) plugins were distributed separately?
The FSF seems of the opinion that a program that uses a
library is a derivative work of the library, because
at runtime the two are combined.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL
It seems logical that they are of the same opinion regarding
plugins.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem
seems to confirm this. Eben Moglen's answer to question 2 in
this Slashdot interview seems to confirm this.
http://interviews.slashdot.org/interviews/03/02/20/1544245.shtml?tid=117&tid=123
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Reply to:
- References:
- Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
- Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian
- From: mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)