[DB-SIG] Re: [Psycopg] GPL or LGPL

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> Il mer, 2002-10-02 alle 10:25, M.-A. Lemburg ha scritto:
> 
>>Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> 
> 
>>>let's restate the problem: bash is GPL'ed. should *any* sh script be
>>>released under the GPL? 
>>
>>bash happens to be part of the OS, so it triggers the special
>>LGPL like clause in the GPL which excludes software using
>>OS facilities from the GPL restrictions.
> 
> 
> so let's take another example:
> 
> Local Variables:
> mode: indented-text
> indent-tabs-mode: nil
> sentence-end-double-space: t
> fill-column: 72
> 
> those lines gets *interpreted* by emacs (i.e., it generate instructions
> to drive a process, something very similar to python bytecode, isn't
> it?)
> 
> then *any* file incorporating instructions for emacs should be released
> under the GPL? and don't say emacs triggers the "part of the OS" clause,
> please. (ok, ok.. i know.. emacs is an OS by itself, but no jokes.. :)

Input and output of GPLed programs are not automatically
covered by the GPL, e.g. the GNU C compiler needs many
instructions to tell it what to do with the code, but that
doesn't make the code automatically fall under the GPL.

Please read clause 0. of the GPL and the FAQ for details.

	http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
	http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
_______________________________________________________________________
eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,...
Python Consulting:                               http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software:                    http://www.egenix.com/files/python/