At 05:09 PM 6/11/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Richard Zidlicky wrote: > > > > Richard wrote: > > > I will NEVER agree to GPL. Under GPL, as soon as you use the > > > tiniest little bit of something "GPL'd", you HAVE to make your > > > code GPL, too. > >Hmmm? > >My understanding, as an open source fan, is that the GPL is infectious - >any software that includes GPL'd code is also GPL'd. You cannot use GPL'd >code in non-GPL releases. It is OK to use GPL code for your own purposes, but if you provide the whole package to somebody else, you either have to remove the GPL'd code, or release the whole thing as GPL. I see this feature of GPL as a good thing. This prevents somebody from "stealing" somebody else's code and making it commercial or whatever. If you find the GPL too restrictive in this respect, then don't "steal" the code and write it yourself. >The C libraries and gcc are GPL'd. The GCC libraries are not GPL'd. They fall under a GNU Library License, which allows GCC compiled code to be sold commercially, even including the binary libraries (but not the source libraries). GNU has Licenses for Software, Libraries and Documentation as three separate licenses, because each have unique issues. Tim Swenson
