Re: The worst that can happen to GPLed code

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> > it would seem that it would be more relevant in the context of
> > Section 1 and Section 3, not Section 2 [first sale aside for a
> > moment ;-) ]). Now, Red Hat sort of concedes that their distro is a
> > "collective work"... See the light now?
> 
> No, since you can redistribute the collection as a whole if you want
> to.  

Sure I can. Because mere aggregation clause covers collective work
(some people disagree, of course). "The language of the GPL is 
opaque and it has many ambiguities", you know.

>     Even if you couldn't, the GPLed part are contained as separable,
                                                            ^^^^^^^^^

That's not the law (and the GPL doesn't use this word).

regards,
alexander.