Re: GPL licenced Java application using non GPL jars (libraries)

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> I think this has been the situation with the readline library (which
> is under the GPL).  Somebody created some stubs that provided
> basically the same interface, and this made software not derivative on

GNU logic. I gather that in the GNU Republic, the status of a work
(not) being a derivative work under the GNU Copyleft Act depends on 
a world-wide search for "some stubs that provided basically the same 
interface" by somebody. Bzzt.

To quote Lee Hollaar:

-----
One can tie oneself in knots trying to make sense of the GPL and
the statements made about it.  It ignores provisions of the copyright
statutes that allow the modification or redistribution of works
without permission of the copyright owner.  It talks about "derived"
works which don't seem to be the same as "derivative works."  And
the explanations from RMS and others often make little sense, as
in the case where something was a derived work until somebody wrote
a non-GPLed math library compatible with the GPLed one. 
-----

regards,
alexander.