> Also, if he is distributing binaries where part of the binary is > LGPL'd or GPL'd code where the _copyright is held by other people_ > (i.e. contributors), then you can make a case that if he's > distributing kqemu-enabled binaries of qemu (that nobody else is able > to legally reproduce), he's infringing the contributor's copyright.
That is the case. If you look at the licences the dissassembly parts are (C) Free Software Foundation and licenced under the GPL, so the whole should be made available under those terms. > But if he's only distributed binaries which are compiled from _his_ > LGPL'd code and _his_ closed source code - well, he can simply do > that, and the binaries come under whatever binary license he's using. This is not the case. Paul _______________________________________________ Qemu-devel mailing list Qemu-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel
