🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <JBW.92Jan27225235@bigbird.bu.edu> jbw@bigbird.bu.edu (Joe Wells) writes:

   In article <MIB.92Jan27202633@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:

      If the code is GPL, but not LGPL, then you cannot do quite as you
      want.  If they are distributed together (even if in multiple files)
      then what you distribute (which is the total program) must be
      distributed under the GPL, or in some other fashion approved by the
      FSF.  

   Copyrights aren't this powerful.  The GPL may attempt to specify this, but
   that can't have any effect.  The "mere aggregation" clause of the GPL does
   not effect anything legally, but rather states clearly the limit of the
   power of the GPL.

Any copy of the FSF source code, by "mere aggregation" or otherwise
can only be done by adherence to the GPL.  If you do not accept the
restrictions of the GPL, then you are not allowed to copy it at all,
by "mere aggregation" or any other means.

The GPL can be as broad or restrictive as it wishes.  If you
distribute fsf code together with your code, then you may be
distributing a "work based on the program".  Whether you do so is
dependent on precedent and the opinions of a judge, with the provision
that "mere aggregation" is not a "work based on the program".  If, for
example, you decided that the isearch function in
emacs/lisp/isearch.el is just what your project needs, you can not
distribute it as an integral part of some program you write without
placing that program under the GPL.  It was clear (to the FSF lawyer,
at least) that there are cases like this which are covered by the GPL.
On the other hand, there are other cases, perhaps those involving GNU
implementations of common functions, like alloca or malloc, where you
might be allowed to do this.

The exact gray area is ultimately decided by a judge.

	-mib