David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > I don't care what you say. Thanks to Wallace, the GPL drafter is on > >> > record: <quote> In fact, the GPL itself rejects any automatic > >> > aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL simply because one > >> > program licensed under the GPL is distributed together with another > >> > program > >> > >> "together with" does not describe the relationship of Siamese twins. > > > > And what's the relevance of that remark? Under Berne Convention > > software is protected as literary works. The mechanism of linking > > is irrelevant. > > Except that it isn't because you don't link unrelated pieces of > software (well, you can, but that is just aggregating them in one > library). They have to interface.
So what? By that standard, a "GPL incompatible" (whatever that means) email program would violate the copyright law if it downloaded or send mail from/to a GPL'd mail server. That may well be true in the GNU Republic, but only in the GNU Republic. regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
