RE: linking GPL to non-GPL

[José Molina]

Thanks very much!

Jose

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Chad Whitacre [mailto:chad@zetaweb.com]
Enviado el: Miércoles, 25 de Mayo de 2005 12:32
Para: Jose Molina
Asunto: linking GPL to non-GPL


Jose,

Not sure myself, but perhaps this FAQ helps?

   http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs


chad


Jose Molina wrote:
> I have a question. If I have a library that is not Free (by FSF
standards),
> and it is distributed as a part of a GNU/Linux distro, and I link a GPL
> program against it, is it permitted by the GPL terms, I mean, can this
> library be considered part of the operating system?. The specific case is
> OpenMotif on a RedHat system. I was going to link a GPL'ed program (not
> developed by me) against it.
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+jmolina=corpmyl.com@gnu.org
> [mailto:gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+jmolina=corpmyl.com@gnu.org]En nombre
> de David Kastrup
> Enviado el: Miercoles, 25 de Mayo de 2005 11:58
> Para: gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
> Asunto: Re: how much is too much?
>
>
> Chad Whitacre <chad@zetaweb.com> writes:
>
>
>>>>I.e., would it be possible to package all GPL code that I want to
>>>>use in an LGPL library and use that from a public domain package?
>>>
>>>Look, "public domain" means that everybody is allowed to do whatever
>>>he wants with the product (including releasing proprietary versions).
>>>It completely escapes me how you can imagine to have the right to do
>>>that.
>>
>>By "use" I meant in linked fashion. My thought was to make the
>>functionality of the GPL'd code available to the public domain code
>>via an LGPL'd library. Either way the answer appears to be "no."
>
>
> What gives you the right to change the GPL to LGPL?
>
>
>>In general I am trying to get educated on the whole
>>copyright/licensing issue. Distinguishing between the two was a
>>first step, the GPL FAQ is explaining more.
>
>
> Well, for one thing, if you get a license for something, it is not
> your option to change the conditions of the license.
>
> If you want different conditions, ask the copyright holder.
>
>
>>The bottom line seems to be that the street between copyleft and
>>non-copyleft free software only runs one way: copyleft can
>>incorporate non-copyleft and retain its identity, but not the other
>>way around. I.e., the GPL's hegemony extends to non-copyleft free
>>software as much as to proprietary software. Accurate?
>
>
> No.  GPLed code is not convertible into other licenses, but that does
> not mean that other code is convertible to the GPL.  There are
> actually very few licenses that allow rereleasing as GPL.
>
> --
> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
> Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss