> Why is Max asking us to further violate additional agreements as a > remedy in violating one?
This is not a remedy in any way. This is a fulfillment of the GPL license terms. You are obliged to do it and it is your problem that it collides with the other parties. It's not Max's problem that your agreements are inconsistent with GPL. If you owed to Max USD 1000, it doesn't matter whether you also owed to Charles another USD 1000. You would have to pay USD 1000 to Max regardless on your obligations to Charles. > We now understand the GPL terms, but it would seem counterintuitive to > expose ourselves to multiple parties. In other words, you say that the MPD developers are just a bunch of crap with lesser importance than the other parties you deal with. You are just packing your disregard in a corporate bullshit to make it sound not so harshly. > We have no problem issuing our code once detangled from other > libraries, which we did but it seems unsatisfactory to Max. It's clear why this is unsatisfactory. Distributing a binary of GPL software compiled together with other software makes you an irrevocable obligation to release the complete source code of the binary -- not just part of it. Maria _______________________________________________ mpd-devel mailing list mpd-devel@musicpd.org http://mailman.blarg.de/listinfo/mpd-devel
