Re: Problem with GPLv3 FAQ about linking with Visual C++

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 2/2/2010 10:07 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >  A bibliography work doesn't aggregate any other's
> > copyrighted material; it's just a list of references to other works
> 
> Yes, exactly. That's the difference between a statically
> linked program and a dynamically linked one. 

Uh retard. Imagine that dynamically linked "library" is shipped along
with the "program" (same ship/cargo truck/box/cd/whatnot) it's linked
with just like in the case of statically linked aggregation. Got it now
silly Hyman?

http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf

"This entire GPL provision in section 2 relating to distribution
of the whole work is technically trivial to avoid. Some
open source projects, trying to stay on the “safe” side of this
GPL provision, advise their customers to separately download
and install required non-GPL software merely to avoid “distribution
as part of a whole.” Thus the distinction drawn by this
part of GPL section 2 has become an inconvenience rather
than a meaningful requirement.

Finally the GPL directly addresses the distribution of collective
works, noting that the GPL does not apply to them:

...In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based
on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on
the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium
does not bring the other work under the scope of this License.
(GPL section 2.)

This sentence seems to mean that only derivative works are
covered by the GPL reciprocity provision, and that “mere
aggregation” of separate works onto common media (or common
computer memory?) does not require reciprocity, even if
those mere aggregations are distributed in one unit (i.e., “as
part of the whole”)."

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)