Re: license issue: calling a GPLv2 library

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hey "derivtated" product of Stallman's bullshiting,

"Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote:
> 
> The OP was distributing copies of a GPL derivtated work, `private
> modifications' do not apply.  Your references to 17 USC 117 are as
> usual, erroneous.
> 
>   5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
>      signed it.  However, nothing else grants you permission to modify
>      or distribute the Program or its derivative works.  These actions
>      are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.

that's not true. Go read 17 USC 109 and 117.

regards,
alexander.