Re: Linus about GPL x BSD(long)

On Fri, 19 Jul 2002, Deven T. Corzine wrote:
[...]
> When the "other code" is code that gets linked with GPL code (which is
> what I was referring to), it doesn't matter if the other code was
> developed independently for some other purpose -- the GPL still
> requires that the other code be relicensed under the GPL in order to
> distribute the combined work, as if the only reason for the other
> code's existence is to subvert the intent of the GPL.

If this were true, then there would not be any GPL X application. And it
would be illegal for Sun to link GNU emacs against Sun's proprietary X
libraries unless they released these libraries under the GPL.  That's
preposterous. Your statement is obviously wrong.


[...]
> Now, let's look at my original statement again:
>
> > > the GPL wants others to give up their freedom to choose a license even
> > > on other code, NOT just modifications made to GPL code.
>
> How can you claim this statement is a lie?

This very broad statement may possibly be true in very narrow and rare
situations (and I am not convinced by your codec/media player example).
And in that it is a lie.


--
Francois Gouget         [email protected]        http://fgouget.free.fr/
     We are Pentium of Borg. You will be approximated. Division is futile.