Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
From: Valdis . Kletnieks
Date: Tue Feb 20 2007 - 10:47:36 EST
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:00:51 +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch said:
> Flame bait alert:
> I heard a talk from an Austrian lawyer an according to his believes (and
> I don't know if he is the only one or if there lots of) one must see
> from the "users" view if the GPL spreads over or not (and the usual
> technical terms like "linking" are basically irrelevant).
> - You are distributing an application which links against a GPL-library.
> If you provide a link and the user/customer has to get and install that
> library, your application can have any license you wish.
> - If you distribute an application and it installs automatically a
> library (e.g. from the CD where your application is installed), your
> applications license must "fit" wit the library license.
So tell me - if RedHat distributes a non-GPL program that uses a GPL
library that is included as part of the distribution, but *not* one that's
usually installed, which rules apply?
Even better - does this mean that I can *intentionally* bypass the licensing by
including a installer script that removed a problematic library, and then
forces the user to re-install it?
Description: PGP signature