Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
[...]
> 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.

Impeccable logic. I have no words.

> 
> 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.

Ok. This thing goes in circles. I'm tired. You won.

regards,
alexander.

P.S. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode