Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

[Alexander Terekhov]

< changing branches >

Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2004-07-07 at 14:25 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > purely source code distribution. How can an aggregation of the
> > CPL'ed and the GPL'ed stuff (e.g. in a tarball) possibly
> > trigger "GPL incompatibility"?
> 
> Because it's not the mere aggregation on a tarball.

Sure it is. As long as CPL'ed works are NOT derivative works of the
GPL'ed works. Just apply the AFC test (and eat some dust ;-) ).

> It's when it's impossible for one to exist without the other.

Define "exist" (just for fun; because what you're driving at is 
totally irrelavant; software is protected as literary works).

> 
> Try running /bin/ls without a libc, you'll find it enlightening.

All windows programs can't run without Microsoft code. And MS code
can't run without things like BIOS, adapter's code and micro-code
in the processors. Under your theory, Intel can tax everybody and
his dog.

> 
> Fortunately, on GNU/Linux, usually is the glibc (LGPL'ed) is used.

Yeah. Except that under your theory the glibc should be under the 
GPL, and not under the "lesser" [well, it's actually even greater*] 
silliness. Now, please don't tell me that "Linus allows this"... 
just think of Hurd.

regards,
alexander.

*) http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:mss:7534