Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 21:53:32 +1100, Tim Churches wrote:
>
> >> Secondly, perhaps you should consider that dynamically linking to a
> >> work is creating a derivative work, which most certainly falls under
> >> the "modification" clause.
>
> [snip]
>
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 14:57:58 +1100, Tim Churches wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In particular:
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
>>
>> [quote]
>>
>> Q: If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
>> that any program which uses it ha
Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In particular:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html
>
> [quote]
>
> Q: If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
> that any program which uses it has to be under the GPL?
>
> A: Yes, because the program as it is a
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But in that case, you're going to need a real lawyer, so you might as
> well talk to one beforehand, and only try what they think you have a
> chance of getting in court.
This is excellent advice. We did, in fact, talk to a real lawyer, and paid him
real mo
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In
> particular, if I distribute an application that has to be dynamically
> linked with a GPL'ed library to run, I need to distribute my
> application under the terms of the GPL.
Mike,
Which section(s) of the GPL say(s) that, exactly? I mean, where is dyna
