[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL traitor !
From: |
David Combs |
Subject: |
Re: GPL traitor ! |
Date: |
Sun, 14 Jun 2009 02:03:07 +0000 (UTC) |
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 cant affect the licenses to
>>> > those preexisting component parts. Again, linking doesnt 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
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Combs, 2009/06/13
- Re: GPL traitor !,
David Combs <=
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/06/14
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Kastrup, 2009/06/14
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Kastrup, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Kastrup, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, David Kastrup, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, jellybean stonerfish, 2009/06/15
- Re: GPL traitor !, Hyman Rosen, 2009/06/15