On Tue, 20 May 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote: > The GPL does not forbid GPLd code to use non-GPLd code from a GPLd project. > If this was not true, then the GPL would be completely unusable. It is bad to > see that RMS in his talks always tells you what he _likes_ to do but never > what > the GPL really does (to make it compatible with reality).
You are correct. As long as the source code for the complete work is distributed in terms which comply with GPL, it is ok. Note that Linus (and others) have more reqirements for Linux than GPL actually requires. Debian Linux would never support this sort of blending. > BTW: Simon Phipps told me last year that the wife of Eric Raymond (beeing a > lawywer) recently wrote an article that claims that the same applies to US > Copyright and that for this reason, Linus _could_ change the license together > with a few additional people. It should be clear to any rational person that lawyers expressed opinions are not necessarily correct or legally significant. If the opinions of lawyers were correct, then they would not be continually contesting each other in court. One of the lawyers loses in every court case which comes to conclusion. This means that lawyers are correct no more than 50% of the time so their opinions are no more valid than simply flipping a coin. The only statement of any consequence is from a court decision. Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
