Re: GPL traitor !

[Hyman Rosen]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Dynamic linking delays the act of copying, but it remains an
> essential integral part of putting the program to its intended
> use.

The difference between static and dynamic linking is that in
static linking the copying occurs as part of making and
distributing the program, and in dynamic linking the copying
occurs, if it does, as part of running the program. This is not
an irrelevant detail; it's an essential difference.

First of all, copyright in a computer program exists when that
program is written. The nature of the copyright does not change
with the execution of the program; even if the program is never
executed at all its copyright is no different than if it is
executed a million times a day.

Second, if execution of the program results in some copying of
some protected work, that copying is separate from the copying
of the program itself. Not least, that copying is done by the
person who executes the program, not by the copyright holder of
the program.

Third, if copying of GPL-licensed libraries occurs during the
execution of the program, no one incurs any responsibilities
under the GPL because the GPL does not impose any requirements
for the execution of a GPL-copyrighted program.

Fourth, any copying of dynamic libraries which occurs for the
purpose of executing the program is permitted by US copyright
law:
    <http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#117>
    § 117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
    (a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.
    — Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an
    infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to
    make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of
    that computer program provided:
    (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an
    essential step in the utilization of the computer program in
    conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other
    manner

> If you construct guns that work with standard ammunition,
> even if you never sell ammunition yourself, you'll still
> have weapon laws apply to your products.

The requirements and limitations of copyright law are determined
by studying copyright law. Arms law has no relevance to copyright
law, nor have you demonstrated with reference to actual US law
that there are arms laws which would cause a program using dynamic
libraries to fall under their copyrights.