Linked by Andrew Youll on Wed 6th Jul 2005 06:25 UTC, submitted by Timothy R. Butler
Qt Thinking on the issue of licensing and KDE, an old hymn came to the mind of OfB's Tim Butler. "As it was in the beginning, is now, And ever shall be" Yes, the issue of licensing has been a perennial problem for the Free/Open Source desktop and he suggests its biggest licensing issue remains: the GPL. Read more at
Permalink for comment 679
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Uhmmm... that's not how the GPL works.

First off, recall that the GPL comes to bear only when something is distributed, not at run time. Thus a piece of code is not magically relicensed at run time by virtue of its being linked to by GPL code. In fact, even in cases of distribution, GPLed code can link to any code licensed under a compatible license (X11/MIT/BSD, LGPL, etc...) and that GPLed code can then be distributed along with its dependencies. In fact, I can even link GPLed code to proprietary binary only libraries so long as I only distribute the GPLed code it in source form.

No, you can't do that. Section three says that a user can redistribute the program in source in binary form. The only exception for non-free libraries are those which are included with the OS. Or, as the GPL says it "However, as a
special exception, the source code distributed need not include
anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary
form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the
operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component
itself accompanies the executable." Since users would be unable to redistribute the proprietary library then no one other then you could distribute your software. Thus, no GPL.

Reply Parent Score: 1