Ciaran O'Riordan wrote: [...] > Dan's blog entry quoted a lawyer who's being consulted during the draftign > of GPLv3 who said that parts of GPLv3 aren't legally sound.
He said that GPLv3 draft is even worse than GPLv2 which nobody understands. The legally unsound bit was about the FSF "position" regarding dynamic linking. He said that "if you asked ten lawyers, ten would say it is not a derivative work. On that particular legal position, I would characterize the FSFs position as a weak legal position" and, more generally, that "The Free Software Foundation has taken certain positions on legal issues that are, well, the best thing you can say about them is that there is no clear basis in law for them." regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
