> From: Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Interesting point. In the ordinary course of programming, I suspect there
> would be no derivative work created, hence the GPL should provide no
> obstacle for distributing the program as open source. As you mentioned,
>
[DJW:] In the normal course of programming the host
program will be combined with the header files (or typelib)
from the libary to produce the object code and the further
reference will be made to the library in producing the
final, executable. You would need clean room development
to avoid this.
One other point is that the argument is about whether the
letter of the GPL allows something rather than whether the
spirit does. If the letter is found defective, it is resonable
to assume that the next version of the [L]GPLed code will
have a licence that is no longer defective. You would then
be stuck with having to maintain a separate development branch.
IANAL
[DJW:]
--
--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
>
>
