Re: GPL question

[mike3]

On Oct 12, 9:37 am, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 06:03:03AM -0700, Mike Cox wrote:
> > I am still confused. Does mere linking make the result realy
> > *contain* code from a GPL program?
>
> Most rational people consider it so, but you seem to want legal advice
> so I hope you follow the sane reasoning of taking the license to a
> lawyer and obtain a binding legal opinion.
>
> Otherwise, feel free to run the risks of getting fired or bankrupt.
>
> > How come they are allowed to do that but I am not?
>
> Are you sure they didn't get a proprietary license from the authors?
> It could also be the case that they haven't been caught yet...
>

I'd find it a little strange that a Free software author -- no, not
just
that, but one for the *GNU Project*, as I think "libbfd" is GNU --
would agree to a proprietary (ie. goes against the ideals of
"Freedom") license, unless of course they realized that _their_
stuff would still be free as you could get the code for it from
some place, eg they just gave a license that overrode the virality.
However it still seems odd that a GNU Project author would
even support a proprietary project...