On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:39:11 +0100, Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Wahaj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I had posted a question on the use of GPL with properietary software. I think >> linking of any kind i.e. static or dynamic of a GPLed API makes the caller to >> also become GPLed. This is clear now. But my original comment was: >> >> 1) We can create an exe of the GPLed API and call it from a properietary >> application. The exe gets the parameters performs its tasks and the calling >> application can get the output >> >> The above seems OK as the exe (called it GPL-exe) based on the GPLed API is a >> seperate application and this exe is being called by a properietary >> application. GPL-exe will be based on GPL license and the properietary have >> its >> own. Is it fine ? Also I believe packaging this GPL-exe with the properietary >> exe have no issue. > > You can read about the position of the FSF here: > > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation > > In particular, if the separate GPL'ed executable has no purpose on its > own, but is created solely to circumvent the license of the library, > then it is *not* okay. >
The quoted link seems to suggest that using pipes as IPC and execing a GPLed binary is a satisfactory work around. I don't think that makes a lot of sense from a copyright law standpoint. Isaac _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
