Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

john sinclair <[email protected]> · Wed, 19 Dec 2001 12:25:02 -0500 (EST)

I'm not so sure I would accept this interpretation.

This implies, for example, that I cannot build a proprietary
plugin for mozilla.

On the other hand, if I'm wrong, then consider this:

Can I build a proprietary module that is callable via RPC and
supply a GPL'ed client interface piece?

Or, similarly, how about a proprietary server with a GPL'ed client
library.

And, if there is a plugin scheme for dynamically loadable modules, I can
always build such a module and claim the module to be proprietary! So now
the module may be used by any program that implements the plugin scheme.
You cannot overturn my rights as the author of a proprietary module by
building a GPL'ed program that can use my module. And you cannot tell
me, if you have been given the right to use my proprietary module, that
because you are now dynamically linking my module with your GPL'ed
program that I must make my module GPL. And if you think that if I
link one instance of an unaltered GPL'ed program with that module that I
have violated any license then switch your cart and horse. The GPL doesn't
dictate what we do with an instance of code, rather it constrains what we
may and may not do with GPL code we have altered and now wish to
redistribute. I know this is only one interpretation but I don't believe
its completely groundless.

On the other hand, if you do build a new edm module and distribute it, you
should make your module GPL so others (outside of the EPICS community)
may use it. This conforms to the spirit of the GPL (imho). Edm was
initially developed by myself on my own time with my own resources. It
was released 1st to an indivdual outside of the EPICS community who worked
on the Vsystem PV object and made other minor contributions to the
development effort. His ability to enjoy additional contributions
from those inside the EPICS community is what the GPL is all about (again,
imho).

There are too many complications here to make this issue a trivial
one.

John

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Steven Hartman wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > One question that nobody can answer (because the courts would probably
> > have to rule on this) is whether it's legal to actually load a program
> > that links together GPL and non-free software, because such a combination
> > involves the act of copying.
> 
> The GPL FAQ seems to address this though from a different point of view.
> 
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LinkingWithGPL
> 
> Q.	You have a GPL'ed program that I'd like to link with my code to
> 	build a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your
> 	program mean I have to GPL my program?
> 
> A.	Yes.
> 
> IANAL and TINLA,
> -- 
> Steve Hartman
> [email protected] | 919-660-2650
> Duke Free Electron Laser Laboratory
> 
> 
> 

John Sinclair
[email protected]
Oak Ridge National Lab
865-576-6362   865-574-1268 (fax)

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System