Re: Question About GNU General Public License

[Isaac]

On 12 Jul 2004 11:25:54 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
> demon2020@hotmail.com (Shadu) writes:
> 
>> My software makes a system call (with a command line that I built) to
>> run the ClamWin Free Antivirus,
>> which is licensed under the GNU General Public License.
>> 
>> The following components form ClamWin Free Antivirus I will use
>> (Without modify):
>> 
>> - clamscan.exe
>> - cygbz2-1.dll
>> - cyggmp-3.dll
>> - cygwin1.dll (Cygwin POSIX Emulation DLL)
>> - cygz.dll
>> 
>> Clam AV Database:
>> - daily.cvd
>> - main.cvd
>> 
>> To make my software work, I will build an interface using Visual
>> Basic, My software will makes a system call (with a command line
>> that I built) to run the ClamWin Free Antivirus.  My software also
>> makes a system call (with a command line that I built) to an
>> antivirus program which I program using VC and distribute as
>> freeware (Not Open Source Code).
> 
> If what you call "make a system call" is just a command line call,
> then it is pretty much established that command line calls imply you
> are using the software, not deriving from it.

I think the only thing really established is that the FSF will not
sue you if you do this.  I am not aware of any legal authority
supporting such a distinction based on copyright law.  I'm also not
certain that an author is required to use this interpretation on
his own code even if he incorporates FSF code into his work.

My personal opinion is that in a situation where I would object to
dyanmic linking to my code, I would not be pleased with some who
used some other form of IPC to accomplish the an equivalent result.

Isaac