[openbeos] Re: openbeos Digest V2 #153

Erik Jaesler wrote:

> This is exactly the kind of dilemma that has M$ shorts in a twist
> over
> the GPL.  The question is, if someone not associated with OBOS (just
> to
> keep the lines clear) writes/ports a GPL driver for use with OBOS, do
> we
> have to GPL the OS?

No, of course not -- unless you decide you want to ship that driver
with OBOS.

The GPL is just a license, which means you are only bound by it if you
choose to
accept the license.  And the only real reason to accept the terms of
the license
for a given program is if you wish to distribute that program.  So as
long as
OBOS does not include the GPL'd code in its distribution, then OBOS
does not
need to be GPL'd.

> If I write a GPL app which uses portions of M$ Word
> via COM, does M$ have to GPL Word?

Nope, not unless M$ wants to ship your GPL app.  I can't even
imagine a legal mechanism by which the GPL (or any other license)
could obtain such power over a party that never agreed to the license
in the first place.  Can you?

> What if my GPL app links to the standard OBOS libraries?

That's fine.  GPL'd apps link to Microsoft's libraries all the time,
with
no problems.  If OBOS libraries linked to a GPL app, that might be a
problem,
but not the other way around.

> The long and short of this is that while the OBOS project should
> refrain
> from porting GPL drivers, there's nothing we can do to stop other
> people
> from doing so.  Those who do are probably in violation of the GPL
> simply
> because they can't force us to GPL the kernel -- the software that is
> "linking" with theirs.

No, they aren't.  GPL'd software can link to non-GPL'd software.  It's
the reverse that may cause trouble.

There are lots of GPL'd apps available to run under Windows, and
nobody is claiming that they are GPL violations, even though
Windows is about as closed-source as one could imagine.

> There is also the issue of the fuzziness around dynamic linking.  If
> I
> write an app which is GPL'd and interfaces with another piece of
> GPL'd
> code and which accepts BMessages to drive its functionality, is any
> app
> which sends those messages considered dynamically linked to the GPL'd
> code?

No.  Dynamic linking means that the link symbols of app A are known to
app B.
BMessages are a communications protocol that do not involve link
symbols,
any more than, say, TCP does.

(Imagine if every Web browser that got a page from a GPL'd web server
had to be GPL'd too... ;^))

Jeremy

Other related posts: