gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL question


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: GPL question
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 19:36:51 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux)

address@hidden (Richard Tobin) writes:

> In article <address@hidden>, David Kastrup  <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>> So presumably the idea is that the two acts together constitute
>>> distribution of a derivative work?  If so - to go back to my earlier
>>> example - is the distribution of the Aquamacs source, distribution
>>> of a derivative work of MacOS X?
>
>>In order not to have to rely on a particular interpretation of this
>>question, the GPL states in section 3:
>>
>>    However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need
>>    not include anything that is normally distributed (in either
>>    source or binary form) with the major components (compiler,
>>    kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable
>>    runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
>
> I think you're misunderstanding my question.  Aquamacs (as far as I
> know) contains code to access Apple's graphical interface
> libraries. As far as I know, there is no other implementation of
> these.  So according to your theory, when a user runs Aquamacs they
> create a derivative work of MacOS X.  If I required the FSF's
> permission to distribute a work that links with readline (ignoring
> that there is now an alternative implementation), surely I require
> Apple's permission to distribute a program that links with their
> libraries.  This does not seem like a desirable situation.

I propose that you read the license coming with the development
version of Apple's libraries.  Of course you will have to heed Apple's
conditions for distributing their code.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]