Scripsit [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Måns Rullgård) > > No. The GPL restricts the creation of derivative works. Linking is > > considered by the FSF to be a case of derivation, but it is certainly > > not the only way that a derived work can be generated.
> And since when does the FSF have the final word in legal matters. If the FSF sues us (or someone else) for distributing Emacs together with code that they don't want Emacs distributed with, then the FSF's word about how the licence is to be interpreted will have a very strong weight in court, given that they are the copyright holders as well as the authors of the license. They cannot make claims that *clearly* are not substantiated by the license, but if there is any reasonable doubt about how the license is to be interpreted, we must expect that a court will rule in favor of the author's interpretation. The FSF would probably have a hard time claiming any copyright interest in the distribution of elisp source that they had nothing to do with - but we certainly need permission from the FSF to distribute Emacs itself. The conditions for getting that permission are outlined in the GPL, but when there is more than one possible interpretation of the GPL, the one FSF likes most wins. -- Henning Makholm Set your feet free!
