On Thu, May 16, 2002 at 03:30:36PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > 2. If you wrote and released the program under the GPL, and you designed > it specifically to work with those facilities, people can take that as > an implicit exception permitting them to link it with those facilities. > But if that is what you intend, it is better to say so explicitly.
This is a dangerous assumption, specifically because the GPL *does* permit you to create a work derived from GPL code and GPL-incompatible code for your own use, but does *not* allow you to redistribute the derivative composite. I can see various circumstances under which the copyright holder of GPLed code may wish to facilitate the former but not the latter, particularly since doing so provides extra leverage for encouraging the copyright holders of the GPL-incompatible software to change their license. > 3. You can't take someone else's GPL-covered code and use it that way, > or add such exceptions to it. Only the copyright holders of that code > can add the exception. > Point 3 says you can't take someone else's code and use it that way. > Point 3 seems to directly contradict point 2. #3 seems poorly worded; I believe the real meaning is "you can't take someone else's code and *modify* it so that it can be used that way". Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
pgpu2iujrqndX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
