On 28/11/06, Martin Paljak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 28.11.2006, at 10:56, Werner Koch wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:47, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > >> I hope you meant L-GPL. > > An GPLed application can't use an LGPLed library if that library in > turn uses GPL-incomatible code. Everything else would open a So if I had an application, 100% GPL and it implemented a 'celan' pkcs#11 interface that loaded pkcs11-spy (LGPL?) what in turn loads a StrangeToken$$$ pkcs11 module, that would not be good ?
You have the legal right to _run_ such a combination. The GPL has no limitation on how you _execute_ the GPL software. You can mix a GPL code and a proprietary code and use it. What you can't (legally) do is _distribute_ such a mix. So using a proprietary PKCS#11 lib with a GPL application is fine. Distributing such a GPL application is also fine because the application can also be used with a GPL-compatible PKCS#11 lib. A similar problem exists for ndiswrapper. See [1, 2] for example. The main difference is that only few (none ?) Windows driver usable by ndiswrapper are GPL-compliant. Bye, PS: I am not a lawyer [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/206149/ [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/02/msg00585.html -- Dr. Ludovic Rousseau _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
