On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 01:25:31AM -0000, Phil Rhodes wrote: > >As long as it is separate binaries that is usually considered a > >"mere aggregation". > >Even a frontend calling them via the command line is not > >considered a "derived > >work" under the GPL. Which is the case for "intrusive" ways which > >still do not > >involve direct linking probably will only be decidable by a judge. > > I have never appreciate the wisdom of this. What it seems to say is: > you can use [GPL software] as part of your program, but you must do > it in a backward and inefficient manner. > > Most users will not understand this distinction, and in the case of > a frontend calling the executable behind the scenes, will not even > be aware that there is a distinction to be made. > > Really, who does this help? Uh, you can trivially write a program that "debugs" the frontend using the other program only via commandline for example. Also it would be rather annoying if no closed-source program was allowed to use grep, sed or even the shell itself, wouldn't it? But mostly it is a clarification of copyright law, and what is considered a derived work and what isn't, so if you have an issue with it my first suggestion would be to complain about your politicians having written an absolutely sh*tty copyright law that leaves everyone guessing what it actually means.
