GPL Compatability (was Re: The State of Python)

[Bernhard Reiter]

In article <8luufo$ags$3 at newshost.accu.uu.nl>,
	m.faassen at vet.uu.nl (Martijn Faassen) writes:
> Moshe Zadka <moshez at math.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>> On 28 Jul 2000, Martijn Faassen wrote:
>>> Moshe Zadka <moshez at math.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Paul Duffin wrote:
>>> 
>>> >> What does GPL compatible mean ? 
>>> > It means that it can be relicenced as GPL.

This is basically correct, but for the resulting whole product.

>>> Are you sure? I thought it meant you could legally link it to
>>> GPL-ed software. That's what the whole Qt/KDE squabble is about, at least.

Yes, this is exactly what it means.
The whole product thing was not produced by the GPL nor is the
complexity of this license its own fault. 

AFAIU it is the law, which has strange interpretations of a whole
product and code linked to each other is a whole product.
To fully secure freedom with a strong copyleft you need to demand
that the resulting product containing your code is still under the 
save copyleft rules. You cannot allow the whole product to be
less well protected or you loose a lot and it would be a serious
backdoor. 

All the GPL tries is to protect the freedom securely and that is
what it does. Other code is not that well protected and only
compatible with the GPL if is allows the resulting product to be
well protected. 

I hope this sheds some light on the issue. :)
	Bernhard
-- 
Professional Service around Free Software                (intevation.net)  
The FreeGIS Project				            (freegis.org)
Association for a Free Informational Infrastructure            (ffii.org)