Dalibor Topic wrote:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 02:37:17PM +0100, Philippe Laporte wrote:
If you link native to a GPL VM, then that code must also be GPL, no?
That is an absolute requirement in the embedded world...
That is true. But running java bytecode in with a GPL vm and loading JNI
libs during that doenst render all the java/native code you run with the
VM to GPL.
and this context does not apply to CLDC...
I don't know much about Maemo. Perhaps you should be more clear on what
you really need/want to do.
Maemo is the platform for the 770. It doesn't have Java support yet, but
when it does it sure can manage CDC, which goes your way, but still, the
big guys will want a clear picture, and in the past LGPL has been a go,
and GPL a no-go.
If that was true, they would not have used a GPLd Linux kernel for the
maemo.
The big guys can have a clear picture: using a GPLd VM is not different
from using a GPLd kernel in their device.
Well, I never heard it put it this way, and I cannot say that I agree.
But really, why is there such a lack of clarity in these matters? Is
there no way to clarity once and for all?
Are you saying SableVM is using FUD tactics? They seem to be believe
strongly in their position...
Believing in something does not make it true. If you want legal advice,
ask a lawyer. If you want to know how someone interprets the GPL on their code,
ask them. If you want to know how the SableVM devs believe the GPL works on
other people's code they 'compete' with, you can have that, too. If you
want to know how the GPL works, you can ask the FSF.
If you want to know, you ask. If you want to believe, then there is no
point in asking as you've already figured out what answers you want, and
just need a rational justification for them, like some 'legal FAQ' on
some obscure web site.
Chose whatever works best for you. :)
I don't see things like this. I think it is the ones with the most to
lose who have the most influential and relevant opinion.
That's Nokia.
