Artifex interprets the GPL and...

Posted Dec 7, 2009 20:31 UTC (Mon) by jeff@uclinux.org (guest, #8024)
In reply to: Artifex launches a GPL-infringement suit against Palm by drag
Parent article: Artifex launches a GPL-infringement suit against Palm

They are incorrect. The GPL is not open to interpretation on this issue (aggregation).

If they want to argue shipping an embedded device with some part of it's firmware
in the FLASH being GPL makes the whole of the firmware derivative, they will find
it a large hill to climb... there have been many cases of GPL enforcement to point to.
Many of us who write code, both GPL and not, for embedded devices will happily give
expert testimony that this does not constitute derivation.

Artifex is not working in the interest of freedom here, it's a business model thing.

Artifex interprets the GPL and...

Posted Dec 7, 2009 21:14 UTC (Mon) by johill (subscriber, #25196) [Link] (1 responses)

So ... is this what Palm did? Or did they create their pdf reader application around it and fail to license that application as GPLv3?

Artifex interprets the GPL and...

Posted Dec 7, 2009 21:24 UTC (Mon) by johill (subscriber, #25196) [Link]

Sorry, as somebody else pointed out and I just found in the sources too -- v2 of course.

It does seem that they didn't publish the code to the pdf viewer application though.

Artifex interprets the GPL and...

Posted Dec 7, 2009 22:10 UTC (Mon) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link]

If you could talk to them about this it would be terrific as it would make
some part of my job much easier. I am in absolutely no position to argue
with them.

My personal opinion is what they said makes some sense and I am not a big
advocate of trying to use the software contrary to the wishes of the
original author, at least not in a professional environment.

Maybe I just misunderstood them.