[PD] gpl vs creative commons
Hans-Christoph Steiner
hans at eds.org
Tue Jan 29 17:01:06 CET 2008
On Jan 29, 2008, at 10:05 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 2008, at 3:08 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>>>
>>> but i really don't know
>>>
>>> mfga.sd
>>> IOhannes
>> Dynamically linked libraries also trigger the GPL. For example, most
>
> yeah; i wanted to stress that shipping a patch with abstraction
> dependencies could even be considered as static linking - because
> people seem to think that static linking enforces the GPL more than
> dynamic linking. (which does say nothing about whether this is true)
>
>> Linux kernel modules are dynamically linked into the kernel these
>> days, and they definitely required to be GPL.
>
> but there _are_ non-GPL'ed kernel-modules.
> even though they are disliked.
Yes, and they are also technically in violation of the GPL, AFAIK. I
imagine that Linus and the FSF has not enforced it because it could
be counterproductive.
.hc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Terrorism is not an enemy. It cannot be defeated. It's a tactic.
It's about as sensible to say we declare war on night attacks and
expect we're going to win that war. We're not going to win the war
on terrorism. - retired U.S. Army general, William Odom
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list