[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: More GPL questions

From: Stefaan A Eeckels
Subject: Re: More GPL questions
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:43:29 +0200

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:10:19 +0200
David Hansen <> wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:08:47 +0200 (CEST) Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> > It should be noted to all that Davids opinion is exactly that, his
> > own; it is also a complete misrepresentation of the opinion of the
> > FSF.  The FSF has been clear on this point, in that a
> > GPL-incompatible work that links to a GPL work is illegal.  This is
> > both answered in the FAQ, and in other spots on
> What about all the java software published under the GPL that
> only runs on the Sun VM with the Sun classpath libraries?  Or
> if i link a GPL program against a non free libc?  Where is the
> difference to the example program that links against a free
> and a non free library? 

The original source code you write is yours, and not affected by the
license of whatever facility is used to compile, link and run it.
Obviously, the fact that you decide to license the code under the GPL
can have no influence on the Java interpreter or class libraries, but
neither can their licenses have an influence on your work.

There can be nothing "illegal" in linking GPLed and non-GPLed works,
for the simple reason that doing so is part of the rights granted to
the owner of a lawful copy of a software program, which is to run it and
modify it (or have it modified) to suit his purposes. 

The only time that you could be infringing copyrights is if you're
distributing the linked program. Depending on interpretation, a
dynamically linked executable is, or isn't, affected by the copyright
of the libraries it links to. It seems obvious that a statically linked
executable, which contains (sections of) a library is covered by that
library's license.

> I would have thought that it's sufficient to publish *only* the
> example program under the GPL.

Not even that - the example program in source format (as the OP
proposes to add) is an original work and not affected by the licenses
of the libraries its compiled alter-ego might call when it's being run.

Stefaan A Eeckels
Tener razón es una razón más para no tener ningún éxito. 
                                        --Nicolás Dávila

reply via email to

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