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.

Well, the GPL have a exception for things, like X, that are normally 
distributed with the operating system. 

Your example clearly fall under it, so no problem.

> That's
> preposterous. Your statement is obviously wrong.

His statement is not wrong the GPL does indeed, with the exception
of distributed with operating system special above, claim this.

But yes, I agree that it is preposterous, and I very much doubt
it would fly in court.