Re: GPL question

[Barry Margolin]

In article <x54qfcqz94.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> 
wrote:

> "Nicholas R. Markham" <markhamnr@bigfoot.com> writes:
> 
> > I have a program that I'd like to utilize the GNU Scientific
> > Library.  Since the GSL is distributed under the GPL (not the LGPL),
> > this means I would have to distribute my program under the GPL as
> > well.  I have no problem with this per se; however, the program in
> > question is part of a larger package, which contains other programs
> > I don't want to distribute under the GPL.  (In fact, since I don't
> > personally own the package, I couldn't GPL it even if I wanted to.)
> 
> It all depends on what "part of a larger package means" whether your
> program and the package form an aggregation or an inseparable whole.
> If they are inseparable, but your program can work without the GSL
> even when used as a part in the whole, you probably can just keep the
> GSL out and don't distribute a complete combination of everything.

Since he said that he's considering distributing the program on its own 
without the rest of the package, I think it's pretty clear that his 
program can be used independently of the package.

> 
> > I'm considering some sort of hybrid approach, where the program in
> > question is distributed in two ways: on its own, under the GPL; and
> > in the package, under a different license.  Would something like
> > this be legal?  It seems to me that it should, since there is no
> > single program that uses the GSL but is not distributed under the
> > GPL.
> 
> Without further details, this sounds somewhat fishy.  I would _not_
> want to rely on this working out.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***