[MPlayer-users] Mplayer as a shared library

[D Richard Felker III]

On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:45:55PM +0100, Balatoni Denes wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi!
> 
> > Sure it does, as long as the linked code is also distributed under the
> > GPL (or equivalently, distributed under terms less restrictive than
> > GPL, such as LGPL, BSD (without advert clause), MIT, or public
> > domain). What it does not allow is actually distributing the GPL code
> > under a less restrictive license such as BSD, but i dont think that
> 
> Yes you exactly wrote what I said, with the slight difference, that I said 
> you can not link with anything less restrictive than the GPL. Not even with 
> LGPL or eg. public domain which has no restrictions at all.

Yes you can. Ask RMS if you don't believe me; I've heard him speak on
this very issue in person before. Of course you cannot lighten the GPL
on the GPL'd stuff you're using, so the combined binary (if there is
one) falls under GPL. However, there is no reason that your code
(which is separate from and not derived from the GPL code) cannot be
distributed under weaker conditions. Section 2 of the GPL describes
this:

  These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If
  identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
  and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
  themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
  sections when you distribute them as separate works.  But when you
  distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
  on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
  this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
  entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote
  it.

  Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
  your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
  exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
  collective works based on the Program.

In fact, provided you never distribute the GPL code at all (including
binaries linked to it), you are not bound by any terms contained in
the GPL. See section 5:

    5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
  signed it.  However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
  distribute the Program or its derivative works.  These actions are
  prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.  Therefore, by

By the way, if what you said were true ("you can not link with
anything less restrictive than the GPL."), then it would be illegal to
link GPL programs against glibc (LGPL), which is nonsense!!

I hope this clarifies things. Some people need to RTFGPL. :))

Rich