Raul Miller writes: > On 7/28/05, Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What statute or case law supports this position? Comparison to >> Grokster et al doesn't hold, for reasons that should have been >> obvious: The GPL explicitly allows a user to use and modify code in >> any way the user sees appropriate; section 2 only kicks in when you >> "copy and distribute such modifications." The standard way that one >> uses GPLed program is by linking its compiled form with other works at >> runtime. It is simply bizarre to suggest that a software author is >> liable for contributory copyright infringement by providing a means >> for a user to do something that the user is explicitly permitted to >> do. > > I don't think that the point is that people would be going to jail for > violating the GPL. > > GPL violators appear to face several potential penalties:
Potential penalties are irrelevant to my question. You assume a priori that such linking is a violation of the GPL. My question was why that assumption is valid. As I explained above, his citation of case law does not fit the facts. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
