"none" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you will, my query/analysis has important implications to Debian and to > any other packagers. I am simply raising the issue that distributing A and B > separately (whether that be a GPL or a non-GPL library or any other code), > and not as a derived work, does not necessarily make you an > infringer.
No, but it also doesn't necessarily free you from being an infringer. Whether you are an infringer depends on the *whole situation* and not just how you split the parts up. > This is important because there shouldn't be uncertainty about how > things can be packaged. One objective of this list I believe is to > determine what code can be packaged together. I am simply exploring > the issue to attempt to clarify it. How does a packager know what > he/she is doing with GPL and non-GPL code "subverts" the goal of the > GPL or not? Are you our friend or not? If you are just a legal beagle who thinks it's "interesting", then you should take this to the appropriate forum, which is gnu.misc.discuss. I find it extremely hard to believe that you have no stake or interest in the matter beyond it's intellectual interest.
