>> Wow. I don't think I could disagree more. Loading the library >> presumably means we are going to invoke some of its code. So you are >> saying that an interpreter under any non-free license can use any GPL'ed >> library? > > That is not at all what he said. The test for whether work A is a > derivative work of work B does not look at programmatic linking or the > mechanism for doing that. > > If program A depends on some interface, and program B is only one of > several programs that implement that interface, A probably is not a > derivative work of B.
If it explicitely calls the interface... > In this case, there are older emacsen -- distributed under licenses > other than the GPLv3 -- that provide the interfaces needed by most or > all of the elisp in question. Sure, the code is fine with older Emacs. We simply shouldn't install it and set it up for GPL v3 versions of Emacs. > It is clearly absurd to say that a work > written a year (or five years) ago depends on a GPLv3-licensed version > of emacs; there was no such thing when the older work was written. Yet it is also absurd to _assume_ that someone that licensed some work under the GPL v2 only meant that any later v3 will do. Respect the licensor's wishes. -- Peter S Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
