[sword-devel] GPL issues (again, sorry)

[Chris Little]

> I don't think the questions are really answered and won't be
> until a court
> decides the issues. I think GPL has fallen into very muddy waters.

I would concede this.  Intent will have a lot to do with any final
judgements though, and RMS's intent is being made more clear (not crystal
clear, but more clear) through the FAQ.

> >And there's a concensus that neither static nor dynamic linking against a
> >GPLed library is ever okay if your product is non-GPL.
>
> Consensus? The new faq clearly says so, but that does not make it so.

I guess I wasn't clear.  I meant there seemed to be a consensus among those
discussing the FAQ on Slashdot that dynamic & static linking are basically
the same and both constitute a violation when done between GPL & non-GPL
works.  I'd say the majority of those who did not have this opinion had the
opinion that the GPL & the new GPL FAQ are unclear on the issue.

But true, just because that's what he tried to say doesn't mean RMS
succeeded in codifying his wishes into an airtight license.

--Chris