Tyler MacDonald wrote:
>Greetings FreeRadius people,
>
> This discussion started on the postgresql's "pgsql-general" mailing
>list. The problem here is that the freeradius-postgresql package needs to
>link against libpgsql, which means that it may be indirectly linked against
>openssl. There is a conflict between OpenSSL's BSD license and the GPL which
>means that it's not legal to distribute a copy of GPL code that is linked in
>this way. It appears that several other GPL apps have added a special clause
>to their license that allows them to be linked against OpenSSL.
>
>
IANAL, but I don't think that this argument flies. I don't think that
indirect linking constitutes derivation. Indeed I don't think that
linking constitutes derivation absent other factors. At least in the
9th Circuit, you have the Gates test (Gates Rubber, not Bill Gates),
which might well suggest that linking is *not* derivation at least in
this jurisdiction.
Generally for one work to be a derivative of another, you have to have
some degree of derivation which is evident. This need not be literal
copying. But hte line migh be quite fuzzy-- for example, a program
which makes extensive use of a non-standard Windows API might be argued
to be a derivative work of Windows (MySQL used to make a similar
argument regarding dependance on their client libraries, so this is not
that far fetched).
The direction Debian is taking this seems rediculous in the extreme--
that one might need a license to develop software for Windows, just like
you would if you wanted to use MySQL only via ODBC....
Best WIshes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting