Re: LGPL module linked with a GPL lib
** Loïc Minier ::
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2005, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > >From the GPL: Activities other than copying, distribution and
> modification are not
> > > covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act
> > > of running the Program is not restricted...
> > So the particular details of how things are distributed in
> > memory while running aren't directly relevant. Modification and
> > distribution are what matters, and it's clear from looking at
> > the packages that GStreamer is distributed in Debian in
> > conjunction with GPLed bits in a manner that's more than "mere
> > aggregation".
>
> I'm not sure to understand: you mean that since some LGPL
> GStreamer plugins are shipped in Debian along with GPL packages
> and they can play together means that the whole is GPLed?
>
> Would it be ok to have a copyright file along these lines:
>
> "The source code for all plugins in the GStreamer Plugins source
> package is licensed under the LGPL, however some plugins are
> built with the help of header files from GPL libraries, and will
> be linked to GPL libraries when loaded in memory. Thus, using
> these plugins will switch their license to GPL, and you can only
> use them in applications with a license compatible with the GPL.
>
> You should have received a copy of the GPL and LGPL licenses ..."
>
> Is a list of plugins necessary? I guess it's up to the
> interested person to check, nowadays it's relatively easy with
> tags and Debian's "copyright" files, and I don't want to maintain
> such a list.
I find this discussion ultimately absurd. Debian is *not*
distributing a derivative work. Debian does *not* distribute a work
that includes both plugins/libraries. The fact that the things are
(dynamically) linked at run time, especially combined with the fact
that the plugins are opened with dlopen() and use stable API, is
*more* than enough to lift any (inexistent IMHO) "no-link"
requirement of the GPL.
Please don't do that.
--
HTH,
Massa
Reply to: