Re: GPL traitor !

[Hyman Rosen]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> In article <7AeQl.95435$HZ1.11368@newsfe15.iad>,
> Hyman Rosen  <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thus, copyright holders of GPLed components grant permission for their
> > works to be copied as part of a collective work only if the work as a
> > whole is distributed under the GPL. And this applies best when the
>
> This is of course nonsense unless you have specific addition information from
> such authors.

You need no such information, because this is what the GPL text specifies.

> The GPL does not include a rule that would allow to make such a claim.

Of course it does:
    <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html>
    To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
    in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of
    an exact copy. The resulting work is called a “modified version” of the
    earlier work or a work “based on” the earlier work.
    ...
    You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
    produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the terms
    of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
    ...
        c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License
        to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. ...

> As long as you only have the GPL text, there is no requirement to have 
> every needed part under GPL just because it is used for compiling/linking
> a GPL program.

I don't know what "used for compiling/linking" means. If a program contains
GPLed components copied into it, the program as a whole must be distributed
under the GPL, as the GPL text quoted above requires.