Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

[Hyman Rosen]

Rjack wrote:
> 17 USC sec. 103(b)

Of what relevance is this? The GPL requires that a combined
work containing GPLed code must be licensed as a whole under
the GPL. This does not mean that the distributor of the work
claims copyright over the pieces he does not own. It just means
that the copyright holders of those pieces must give permission
for them to be distributed this way. If they have given such
permission, the combined work may be distributed under the GPL.
If they have not, the combined work may not be distributed at
all.

Your mistake is to assume that a copyrighted work may be made
part of a combined work and distributed that way without
permission of the copyright holder if that holder has given
permission to distribute standalone copies of the work.