Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

[Per Abrahamsen]

Haakon Riiser <hakonrk@ulrik.uio.no> writes:

> I can't even believe why they
> would do such a thing -- are they afraid of getting infected by
> the GPL license in some way?  Do they mention the GPL specifically?

The Visual C++ runtime library license does not mention the GPL
specifically, but does mention "copyleft" licenses in general.  As far
as I can see, it hits both GPL, LGPL, QPL, and perhaps even MPL (which
is a very weak copyleft).

I believe the GPL is the main target, because GPL'ed software are the
main competition to Microsoft in some markets.  Most notoriously, the
Samba server.

> Here's what our lawyer said (more or less):

As another poster said, listening to your lawyer is a lot smarter than
listening to what I, or any other in this group, may say.

> All restrictions on distribution of the GPL'd program appears under
> GPL section 2, which specifically targets modified copies only:

Please note that the GPL does not *restrict* distribution.  It
*allows* distribution.  By default (i.e. copyright law), distribution
is not allowed.  So you should search for those clauses that
explicitly allows distribution, not a lack of clauses that disallows
distribution.

>   2. You may MODIFY your copy or copies of the Program or any
>      portion of it, THUS FORMING A WORK BASED ON THE PROGRAM, 

Logically, this sentence (fragment) does not say that modifying the
program is the only way to form a work based on the program.  It
implies that *if* you modify the program, you create a work based on
it.  Nowhere does it states what happen if you do not modify the
program.