Re: GPL traitor !

[David Combs]

In article <slrnh0rlc5.o0n.jedi@nomad.mishnet>,
JEDIDIAH  <jedi@nomad.mishnet> wrote:
>On 2009-05-15, Joerg Schilling <js@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> In article <gZWOl.22205$hX2.11921@newsfe19.iad>,
>> Hyman Rosen  <hyrosen@mail.com> 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.
>

Well, "legally" (but no lawyer me!) one could maybe infer a
difference in INTENT?

David