[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GPL question

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: GPL question
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 19:36:51 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) (Richard Tobin) writes:

> In article <85zm43wmct.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup  <> 
> wrote:
>>> So presumably the idea is that the two acts together constitute
>>> distribution of a derivative work?  If so - to go back to my earlier
>>> example - is the distribution of the Aquamacs source, distribution
>>> of a derivative work of MacOS X?
>>In order not to have to rely on a particular interpretation of this
>>question, the GPL states in section 3:
>>    However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need
>>    not include anything that is normally distributed (in either
>>    source or binary form) with the major components (compiler,
>>    kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable
>>    runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
> I think you're misunderstanding my question.  Aquamacs (as far as I
> know) contains code to access Apple's graphical interface
> libraries. As far as I know, there is no other implementation of
> these.  So according to your theory, when a user runs Aquamacs they
> create a derivative work of MacOS X.  If I required the FSF's
> permission to distribute a work that links with readline (ignoring
> that there is now an alternative implementation), surely I require
> Apple's permission to distribute a program that links with their
> libraries.  This does not seem like a desirable situation.

I propose that you read the license coming with the development
version of Apple's libraries.  Of course you will have to heed Apple's
conditions for distributing their code.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

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