[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: cdrtools

Daniel Schepler <schepler@math.berkeley.edu> writes:

> On Saturday 12 August 2006 02:47 am, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> Daniel Schepler <schepler@math.berkeley.edu> writes:
>> > According to the GPL, section 0:
>> >
>> >   The act of running the Program is not restricted...
>> >
>> > And since dynamic linking is done at the time the program is run, this
>> > would appear to me to be what applies.  In particular, it appears to me
>> > that you could satisfy the GPL and still dynamically link against a
>> > non-free library, and distribute both, by invoking the "mere aggregation"
>> > clause of section 2.
>> This does not mean that anything that happens when you run the program
>> is not restricted.  For example, the act of running GNU cp and sed is
>> not restricted, but that cann't possibly mean that the GPL gives you
>> carte blanche to go ahead and violate the GPL through use of cp and
>> sed.
> I'm afraid I don't see what your point is, here.  Of course the GPL
> allowing me to use a GPL'd httpd to distribute non-free software
> doesn't automatically mean I would be blameless if I used it to
> distribute, say, a non-free program foo linked against libmad.  The
> point, I think, is that distributing such a thing as the non-free
> binary of foo along with a package of a shared libmad is essentially
> the same as distributing a binary with libmad linked in statically,
> which is clearly disallowed.  Both are just different ways of
> distributing the combined work of foo + libmad.

Yes, I agree completely.  This seems to be the exact opposite of what
you said in the quoted text above.


Reply to: