On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 10:27:20AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Måns Rullgård: > > > The phrase "running the Program" is not directly applicable to a > > library, so we have to assume that for libraries, this translates into > > using the library, i.e. causing its code to be run, typically by > > running a program that uses the library. This act being unrestricted > > per the quoted paragraph, it follows that any program can link with a > > GPL library, no matter what license that program has. > > This only supports the widely held belief that you can do what you > want with GPLed software inside your own four walls, without thinking > too much about copyright issues. (I think this is quite an important > freedom!)
Indeed, the GPL only applies to redistribution, this is a widely known fact. And you only have to redistribut the source to the ones you are giving the binaries to, not the world at large. > Usually, the interesting question is if you are permitted to > distribute the linked program, and if dynamic linking makes a > difference. nope, the only difference between dynamic linking and static linking is if you use the LGPL. I am told that also the distribution of something in the sole intent of being linked with GPL code, is already problematic, but that is up to interpretation i guess. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]