M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: > Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> OK, say I use the X11 license. Now suppose someone installs a closed > >> source plugin. Suppose it also happens that this same user has > >> installed some GPL plugin. Both plugins would be allowed separately, > >> right? When the user runs the program, it will load both plugins. > >> Would this in some magical way make the plugins derived works of each > >> other, thus violating the GPL? > > > > No. But a vendor could get into trouble if they shipped both. > > How's that? The GPL allows distribution together with non-GPL works, > as long as the non-GPL things are not derived from anything GPL'd. In > my opinion, placing two shared objects in the same tar file doesn't > make one a derived work of the other. Would it make a difference if > the offending (to rms) plugins were distributed separately?
The FSF seems of the opinion that a program that uses a library is a derivative work of the library, because at runtime the two are combined. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL It seems logical that they are of the same opinion regarding plugins. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem seems to confirm this. Eben Moglen's answer to question 2 in this Slashdot interview seems to confirm this. http://interviews.slashdot.org/interviews/03/02/20/1544245.shtml?tid=117&tid=123 Arnoud -- Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
