> 	The issue here isn't what the *original* author can do. The problem
> arises when somebody wants to reuse parts of the original code. The
> sequence of events goes like this:
> ~ - You write some code and license it under the GPL;
> ~ - I take your code (or part of it), write some more code that
> interfaces with yours and want to distribute it. Then I can't choose
> the license under which I distribute *my* code.

(For the sake of argument, I take over the "you" character in your message.)

The whole point is that, if you took some of my code to do yours, then it is
not just _your_ code: it is _our_ code.

The FSF lawyers make a lot of noise and smoke, and pretend that the "viral"
effect of the GPL is wider that it actually is. If your code interfaces with
GPL code, but do not contain any GPL code itself, there is absolutely no
legal basis for your code to be under GPL. The resulting binary, on the
other hand, as a mix between GPL code and your code, could not be
re-distributed under a more restrictive license.

Post a reply to this message