on Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 05:07:22PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
If I want to link a program with a closed source, patent-ridden, maggot-eaten library, isn't that up to me? After all, I don't have to distribute that linked program, nor the source modifications, if there are any.
It's not at all clear to me that the GPL (assuming that's what you're moaning about) actually prohibits you from doing this.
Well, the last bit of /usr/src/linux/COPYING says:
This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Library General Public License instead of this License.
and then http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWritingFSWithNFLibs *shrug*
Furthermore, I believe you could distribute the modified source under section 2, even though it would only be useful in conjunction with a non-free library.
Until there was a free version of the library (motif/lessif..)
Nothing requires a developer to use the "or any later version" clause in their declaration, but many do.
And GNU doesn't explicitly say you can leave it out. Many people writing software for free, can't afford lawyers.
I think they can employ common sense though.
Courts can't necessarily.