Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Causing the linked library to be copied into memory is governed by copyright law. Unless you can find an excpption (such as fair use or implied license), causing such copying would infringe any copyright on the library.
Well, here's the statute: <http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000117----000-.html> § 117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs (a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.— Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided: (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner So that's OK.
You can't argue implied license if the library's license is overtly violated. You can't argue fair use if the library author's goals (as described in the GPL and its preamble) are cleverly and deliberately being undermined.
I'm not arguing either of those things. I'm saying simply that a program dynamically linked to a library does not require permission of any sort from the copyright holders of the library. The license terms of the library are completely irrelevant to the program. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
