Off-topic - GPL [Re: gnupg 1.0.4-1 and WinME?]
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 12:00:14 -0500
On 2000.10.24, in <20001024144525.E19106@gnupg.de>,
"Werner Koch" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, dueze wrote:
> > Becky! has a cool GnuPG plugin (a DLL) which is GPL. Isn't possible to adapt
> So Becky must also be GPLed - great. Remember, you can't link a non-GPLed
> program to a GPLed library.
Is this argument truly resolved?
I prefer to think that a DLL is not a GPL violation, because it's
runtime-linked. I don't agree that FSF can restrict how your computer
resolves symbols at runtime, although I'll accept that they can limit
what other code is joined with the copylefted code for distribution.
Limiting DLL usage seems akin to saying that you can't use the Oxford
English Dictionary to look up words from certain kinds of books --
those published in countries that the U.K. has embargoed, for example,
or those published by non-academic publishers. Oxford can control who
distributes copies of their dictionary, but they can't restrict which
resources the dictionary is used to provide functionality to.
So, the way I see it, the DLL would have to be GPL, but Becky! need not
Anyway, this presumes that the DLL contains GnuPG code, and is not just
a wrapper for invoking GnuPG. It wasn't clear to me from discussion so
far that this is the case.
-D. email@example.com NSIT University of Chicago
Archive is at http://lists.gnupg.org - Unsubscribe by sending mail
with a subject of "unsubscribe" to firstname.lastname@example.org