From: Austin Ziegler <austin@...>
Date: 2003-07-10T05:36:51+09:00
Subject: Re: My brief and torrid affair with Ruby.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 03:49:02 +0900, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 01:29:05AM +0900, Rasputin wrote:
>> If I spend the effort to write code, I think *I* should be
>> allowed to choose what to do with it, rather than leave that
>> choice to the author of a library I used. That's not free in my
>> book.
> This is exactly what people get wrong about the GPL!!! The GPL
> does NOT inhibit your ability to choose what to do with your
> work!!

Actually, it does. See my other message on this matter.

> The GPL does NOT change the license of your work. It is simply not
> possible for copyright law to do that, and the GPL doesn't try to.
> The GPL will NOT alter the license of your work.

Your work, no. Your distributed program, yes.

> You are given a library and you are allowed to use it under
> certain conditions. You have a choice. Either comply, or don't use
> it. If you "mistakely" break the license (e.g. by including some
> of it's code into your programs) your work does not suddenly
> change license. It's still yours and you choose what to do with
> it. Rather, you are in violation of the GPL license, and if you
> don't like the GPL terms you should remove the relevant code.

The problem here isn't "including the code" -- that would violate
the LGPL, too -- it's *using the services* of a library. Arguably
not including the code.

- -austin
- --
austin ziegler    * austin@halostatue.ca * Toronto, ON, Canada
software designer * pragmatic programmer * 2003.07.09
                                         * 16:34:59

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com

iQA/AwUBPwx8wmZOwWepqGDiEQKKMQCeNB1ske5vTaCLjQByAPzbMfvbcwgAoMWb
aZvYzsCxTez3/js19r6XElCL
=CasF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----