Kirsten Chevalier wrote:
I am not a lawyer, but there are a couple of important points getting
missed in this thread:
[...]
"That's just silly" isn't a defense.
[...]
and thus "trust me, we're not going to sue you" isn't the answer they're
looking for, even if it's a completely accurate answer.
I'm not a lawyer either, but I've discussed this a bit with one. Since
the GPL is a voluntary licensing with no renumeration, the intent of the
licensor will be given a lot more weight than in a negotiated agreement
between two (more or less equal) parties. I think a clear statement
from the author that linking statically is allowed in his interpretation
of the license will be sufficient, even if it's not obvious from the
licencing text. FSF or other third parties opinions should be
irrelevant. So actually asking and getting the author's opinion is
probably a good idea.
This is according to Norwegian law, but I think such a statement will in
any jurisdiction make it clear that you were acting in good faith. (Just
make sure you have a contingency plan for when Duncan asks you to cease
and desist :-)
(And of course there's nothing to prevent you from being met at the
airport the next time you travel to country with different copyright law
enforcement. Also, there are other copyright holders to this particular
code who may want to have their say in the matter.)
-k
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
