[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GPL traitor !

Subject: Re: GPL traitor !
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 15:50:13 -0500
User-agent: slrn/ (Debian)

On 2009-05-15, Joerg Schilling <> wrote:
> In article <gZWOl.22205$hX2.11921@newsfe19.iad>,
> Hyman Rosen  <> wrote:
>>Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>>> The law makes it clear that the GPL can’t affect the licenses  to
>> > those preexisting component parts. Again, linking doesn’t matter.
>>This is false, for static linking. The exclusive right to authorize
>>the copying of of a component into a linked program rests with the
>>copyright holder. Therefore, to copy and distribute such a linked
>>work requires permission from the copyright holder of each component,
>>and the GPL requires that the work as a whole be distributed under
>>the GPL.
> This is nonsense - sorry.
> There is no difference between static and dynamic linking.

   How can you possibly, honestly, as someone that's supposed to actually
have a clue, actually say this when you obviou sly know (assuming that 
you aren't just an imposter) that there are very real practical end user
difference between dynamic and static linking?


    Go torment someone that forked your work or something...

        On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...

        When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were        |||
        meant to be computationally convenient rather than just     / | \
        arbitrarily assigned.

reply via email to

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