[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

From: Rui Miguel Seabra
Subject: Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 23:59:48 +0100

On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 00:41 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 00:15 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > No other conclusion makes sense. If it were not the case, then
> > > any program using the applications program interfaces (APIs) of an
> > > operating system could be considered a derivative work of that
> > > operating system.
> > 
> > Yes, that's right. That's why the glibc is LGPL and not GPL.

LOL, you're like a robot, continuously posting the same gibberish and
self references...


Posted by yourself, no external references


Baffled by this link. You poit to something that challenges your POV.


Ah external references (some), let's see:

Previously Kastrup said:
  The whole CD is a derivative work in the form of an agglomeration.

Then you reply (standing high on the chair):
   You can't have it both ways. It's either a derivative work or 
a compilation (collective work)

Of course, what Kastrup meant was collective work (but used a confusing
choice of words).

Of course, the technical term is not derivative. But it's easy to get
confused trying to put it in ways 3 year olds would understand and you
still don't.

As to usage of Linux, Linus himself adds an explicit permission to link,
just before the GPL v2:

 NOTE! This copyright does *not* cover user programs that use kernel
 services by normal system calls - this is merely considered normal use
 of the kernel, and does *not* fall under the heading of "derived work".

So it was _his_ call to declare it outside the scope. Don't confuse an
explicit permission from the author with the default.

> > >                   And, under the exclusive right to prepare
> > > derivative works, the copyright owner of an operating system such
> > > as Microsoft Windows could control who was allowed to write
> > > programs for that operating system.
> >  
> > More and more. Right now Microsoft is trying to prevent creation of
> > GPL'ed software on Windows toolkits...

DJB would be right, if he was right. But he isn't. A brilliant coder,
though I just appreciated style and not content.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]