> Why is Max asking us to further violate additional agreements as a
> remedy in violating one?

This is not a remedy in any way. This is a fulfillment of the GPL
license terms. You are obliged to do it and it is your problem that it
collides with the other parties. It's not Max's problem that your
agreements are inconsistent with GPL.

If you owed to Max USD 1000, it doesn't matter whether you also owed to
Charles another USD 1000. You would have to pay USD 1000 to Max
regardless on your obligations to Charles.

> We now understand the GPL terms, but it would seem counterintuitive to
> expose ourselves to multiple parties.

In other words, you say that the MPD developers are just a bunch of crap
with lesser importance than the other parties you deal with. You are
just packing your disregard in a corporate bullshit to make it sound not
so harshly.

> We have no problem issuing our code once detangled from other
> libraries, which we did but it seems unsatisfactory to Max.

It's clear why this is unsatisfactory. Distributing a binary of GPL
software compiled together with other software makes you an irrevocable
obligation to release the complete source code of the binary -- not just
part of it.

mpd-devel mailing list

Reply via email to