Question is, what is the difference between (1) calling a function in a GPL shared library
(2) running an external GPL program and parsing its output One shares code, the other doesn't (unless the output contains copyrightable bits). As for rjack, ignore him. > > How come they are allowed to do that but I am not? > > Are you sure they didn't get a proprietary license from the authors? My engineer thinks that's unlikely for a number of reasons... (sorry for picking on afformentioned project again, nothing personal, it's just the first result on my research list) (1) afformentioned project is free for personal use. (2) afformentioned project comes with 'windent', a gui'fied version of GNU indent 1.10.0 (says so right there in its main window, "This is adaption of Indent 1.10.0, Copyright GNU."), yet no source code available; plus it's distributed as part of a proprietary project. (3) afformentioned project's runtime contains a function named 'edit_distance()' that, according to runtime docs, is released under GPL terms, and goes on, | | The source code is distributed in the lcc directory, | "\lcc\src\editdistance" as required by this license. | i.e., runtime is closed source, only sources for GPL part are provided. With a proprietary license, this surely wouldn't be necessary, but under GPL the whole library must be GPL, right? Yes, this has been repeated now several times. If you use GPL licensed code (either linking, copying, or whatever), then the *WHOLE* work must be licensed under the terms of the GPL. So let me rephrase my initial question, "If I do get caught, what are the consequences. Are there any?" You get sued, and you get to pay legal fees and damages. Or you settle, if you get the chance, and release your deriviate work under the GPL. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss