Re: On interpreting licences (was: KDE not in Debian?)
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
>
> > > b/c "executable work" as written in the quoted sentence above refers to the
> > > executable work as it is being distributed, not as it exists at run-time).
> >
> > You're claiming here that even though Qt must be linked with kghostscript
> > that the executing program doesn't contain Qt?
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 12:53:51PM -0500, William T Wilson wrote:
> The executing program isn't relevant because the GPL doesn't specify
> the conditions the program can be run under. It only specifies the
> conditions the program can be distributed under.
The GPL is what gives permission to distribute that program.
The GPL only gives permssion to distribute the program if you also make
available the complete source code for that program (where that source
has to be available under terms and conditions that satisfy the GPL).
You're claiming that the complete source code doesn't contain a part
of the program which is necessary for it to run?
> > > I.e., the GPL does distinguish b/w dynamic and static linking.
> >
> > It doesn't even use the term "linking" in the terms of the license.
>
> I think it does, by implication if not directly. If you link
> statically with a proprietary library which is not part of the
> operating system then you cannot distribute under the GPL. But you
> can if you link dynamically, because you aren't distributing any
> proprietary code at all. You're just assuming that the required
> proprietary code will already be on the target system.
Ok, so your assertion is that code which is necessary for the program
to run -- which is included in the executing program -- is not a part
of the program?
--
Raul
Reply to: