> Note that nobody can give you definitive answers to questions like this > since they haven't been litigated. So any answer is an "educated guess".
Yes. I understand I cannot get definitive answers for license interpretation. > My view is that it's both, depending on the context. Remember that, from > the perspective of copyright law, executing a program is making a "copy" > of that program. The GPL (or the Runtime Exception) don't include those > copies in their specific restrictions and limitations, but when you > try to define terms, I think you need to reach the fact that these > are copies. > > So: > > When the new version of the library is distributed, it's an "independent > library" and (assuming it's GPL, not LGPL), the GPL rules apply to it: > the vendor needs to provide the ability to get source under the usual > GPL rules. > > But when an application dynamically links with the (new) library, that > application remains a "work of Target Code" and the GPL+Exception rules > apply to any situation where that work is copied. Thank you for your clarification. I understand the new version of the library will be an "independent library". Best Regards, Hiraku Toyooka
