Alex Rousskov wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Arnoud Engelfriet wrote: > > > "Our software can be linked with any library supporting Foo > > > API. Users report success with FooLib on Linux. Other Foo API > > > libraries may be available in your environment. Known compatibility > > > problems with Foo libraries are available by searching our bug > > > database at ..." > > > > Can you really say that seriously if the _only_ implementation > > available is GPL-licensed FooLib? And more importantly, will a > > judge believe you? > > IMO, you can say that seriously if your program can accept any > implementation of a published API. Availability and licensing of > libraries should be irrelevant.
If there's only one library in existence that implements the API, then you _must_ have used that library. Then I cannot see how your program can be anything other than a derivative of that library. Arnoud -- Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/ -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3