Re: GNU licenses

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> 
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> > [...]
> >> > Oh, so the license then spreads to cover all of your ORIGINAL work
> >> > as well.
> >>
> >> No, it doesn't.  You are bound by the GPL only for such software which
> >> integrates GPLed software as a part of it.  Namely software which is
> >> _not_ all your ORIGINAL work.
> >
> > Yeah, here we go. "Integration" (hey dak, Moglen calls it
> > "interpenetration"), "not all yours" and all that silliness. Stop
> > bullshiting, GNUtian dak.
> 
> Note to Mike: Terekhov is a troll with an anti-GNU agenda.  He is fond

I thought I've been promoted to netkook. 

Note to Mike: ignore threats of court action from GNUtians. They have 
no chance to enforce infection in court of law. And they know it. Here's
free advice right from the "GPL Compliance Lab" (my what a bunch of 
pompous lunatics):

<quote copyright=Free Software Foundation>

Don't go to court

 FSF hasn't.
 Court is expensive
 Judges don't understand technology
   "Is static linking like two icons on one desktop?"
       -Judge Saris, MySQL v. Nusphere oral argument

</quote>

Translation: the FSF doesn't really believe that they could fool a
judge into buying (hint: the GPL lost miserably in MySQL v. Nusphere)

http://web.novalis.org/talks/compliance-for-developers/slide-49.html

[begin textual copying copyright=Free Software Foundation]

July 27, 2004 GPL Compliance for Software Developers Legal notes
----------------------------------------------------------------

Legal notes

Static linking creates a derivative work through textual copying

Most dynamic linking cases involve distributing the library

Still a derivative work:

Dynamic linking

Distributing only the executable (testtriangle)

Still a derivative work:

Distributing the source code of software which links to a library

[end textual copying]

GNU-ish "legal notes" idiocy.

regards,
alexander.