[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL question

From: mike3
Subject: Re: GPL question
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:48:02 -0700
User-agent: G2/1.0

On Oct 12, 9:37 am, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 06:03:03AM -0700, Mike Cox wrote:
> > I am still confused. Does mere linking make the result realy
> > *contain* code from a GPL program?
> Most rational people consider it so, but you seem to want legal advice
> so I hope you follow the sane reasoning of taking the license to a
> lawyer and obtain a binding legal opinion.
> Otherwise, feel free to run the risks of getting fired or bankrupt.
> > How come they are allowed to do that but I am not?
> Are you sure they didn't get a proprietary license from the authors?
> It could also be the case that they haven't been caught yet...

I'd find it a little strange that a Free software author -- no, not
that, but one for the *GNU Project*, as I think "libbfd" is GNU --
would agree to a proprietary (ie. goes against the ideals of
"Freedom") license, unless of course they realized that _their_
stuff would still be free as you could get the code for it from
some place, eg they just gave a license that overrode the virality.
However it still seems odd that a GNU Project author would
even support a proprietary project...

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]