2008/11/14 Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Another question is if that "strict" interpretation of the GPL could >> be actually enforced, of course. Coming back to the GSL example, it >> seems a more flagrant violation of the license is already happening: >> http://www.numerit.com/gsl.htm (apparently the publisher of that >> product thinks that linking to a GPL dll doesn't impose any obligation >> to him, but the usual view of the FSF is quite the opposite; I just >> found that page by chance, I don't know anything else about that >> particular case).
A "strict" interpretation of the GPL does not stop numerit from doing what they do. They do not distribute the GSL in any form. They tell you to go get the GSL dll from somewhere. This misconception of the license terms comes about because of the use of the word 'use'. If I distribute a short C program that has a call in it to a function that has the same name as something in the GSL, does my C program use the GSL? No. Maybe it _mentions_ the GSL, but the GPL has no problems with that. I'm distributing my C program, and not the GPL-covered code, so I can license it how I like. I can't find any rage from the FSF about what Numerit are doing, so I assume they're not considering it a violation. Barry ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
