Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Usually, "owner of a copy" refers to a copy that the copyright owner or his representative or retailer already made, and then physically gave to you, e.g., on CD-ROM. I doubt that you are the owner of a copy if you made the copy yourself.
You're wrong, but in any case, if the library is under the GPL, the GPL says "You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force." Let's review. Someone creates a library and distributes it under the GPL. Let's call it libGNU, and suppose that it exists in DLL form. I create a program that dynamically links to libGNU and uses its services. Let's call it HyProg. I assert that I may distribute copies of HyProg unaccompanied by libGNU under any terms I wish. The FSF asserts that HyProg must be distributed under the GPL. I do not believe that there is any legal basis for the FSF's claim. If you do, please explain. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss