Roman Haefeli wrote: > > ask a lawyer to check in detail, if this is true. however, if licenses > could cross 'levels of abstractions' in the sense of pd patches being > affected by the license of pd,
afaik, licenses do not cross "levels of abstractions". however, if i have a collection of abstractions published under the GPL, then i think i don't cross this magical border. next comes the question, what is the difference between an abstraction and an external non-abstraction object. afaik, GPL does not dissolve just because of languages used. (that is: porting of code from one language to another is (to my knowledge) not really affected by the GPL (e.g.: you can chose the license again) as it usually involves re-coding an algorithm rather than re-using pieces of code.; but this is unrelated to the language a library is written in) finally, i am still unsure about the "static linking" clause, and how it affects an interpreted language. i guess, if you have a patch that depends on a GPL'ed pdlib, and you are distributing your patch with this library (e.g. for convencience reasons), then you are kind of _statically linking_ and thus your patch is automatically GPL'ed too. but i really don't know mfga.sd IOhannes _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
