Re: Lua and GNU readline linking

[Glenn Maynard <glenn@...>]

On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 11:50:45PM +0000, David Given wrote:
> If you write software that uses GPL'd software, and you produce a binary that 
> contains compiled versions of that GPL'd software, you are only legally 
> entitled to distribute the result if it's licensed under the GPL, because 
> it's a derivative product.

There's also always been a gray area with binaries dynamically linked
against GPL libraries.  There are wildly conflicting points of view,
between "always viral" (the FSF's original stance?), things about
"published interfaces", to the Linux kernel's strange "this symbol is
GPL and this one is not" (which seems like wishful thinking, and maybe
even a GPL violation in and of itself), to "never viral".  It may be
impossible to know for sure without it going to court, or at least getting
unbiased legal counsel.  (However, it seems safe to say that linking luac
against readline has no effect on Lua itself.  IANAL.)

That's why I like permissive licenses, like Lua's.  They're much less
complicated.  :)

-- 
Glenn Maynard