Re: GPL - GSL and derivative work.

[Steve ROBBINS <stever@bic.mni.mcgill.ca>]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 07:55:50AM -0700, Edwin Robert Tisdale wrote:
> Timothy H. Keitt wrote:
> 
> > These are pretty clearly spelled out at www.gnu.org.
> > Short answer: LGPL, linking from closed-source OK.;
> > GPL, you have to release the source of the application
> > under the GPL to link with a GPL'd library.
> 
> The GPL only prevents you from distributing the GPL'd library
> without distributing the application source code.
> You can distribute the application object code
> without the application source code without violating the GPL
> and let users link it into the GPL'd library themselves.

This is not true.  If your application requires the GPL'd library
it is to be considered a "derived work" of the library, and all
sources must be shipped with a binary.  This is pretty clearly
laid out in the text of the GPL, and the GNU web site has further
disucssions.  In particular, see

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


If you intend to split legal hairs about what constitutes
a "derived work", that is a discussion I do not want to have.
Try the newsgroup gnu.misc.discuss.


> I don't think that there is any practical way for the FSF
> or the library developers to prevent users from doing this.

Well, the practicality is a separate question.  ;-)
But it is beyond question that this is not what authors of
GPL'd libraries *intend*.

-Steve