windows - Does GPL code linking with proprietary library depend which is created first? -


Microsoft makes its Windows and MFCC DLL libraries etc. An open source development writes a new MFC application and releases the source code GPL The app has to link to MS DLL / Library for running the app in Windows, but I do not think anybody can argue that now we have the right to give Microsoft GPL the power to DLL.

This means that the GPL license really depends on who "created" first? If the proprietary library is created first (such as Windows DLL) which is published without any links and GPL code and later a GPL program is connected, then the GPL program does not convert the proprietary library to GPL Although the ownership code is connected to the "GPL code".

If this happens, then such company of Nvidia or Real Networks can do the following? Let's assume that they want to keep proprietary HDDoding media decoding engine libraries private, but they also want the "leverage" open source GPLD code to display their hardware.

  1. They create a proprietary library to decode the media and release some sample code.
  2. Anyone (opensource development) creates a "plugin" that can have a GPLed code such as XBMC, MPlayer or VLC
  3. in this owned library because they can debate because they are the first proprietary library Created (as MS first makes all DLLs), GPL programs that are related to their ownership code are not written in the GPL code secretly. In theory, someone can argue that OpenSource Developer creates a GPL vlc.exe file that links to the Nvidia-owned Media Decoder Library, violating the GPL license.

    Does this mean that all GPL programs are running in Windows such as VLC, GIT, Sigwin etc are violating all GPL licenses because they need to be affiliated with the proprietary Microsoft Windows Library. Episode 2: What's wrong with this:

    Nvidia can create a new hardware residue library that hides the latest graphics functions. They also make a freeBSD driver along with this library and release the source code of the BSD driver but not the library source code.

    Someone (Linux Developer) can implement Linux Driver which links to this library, Nvidia Graphics driver for Linux but since Nvidia did not do it, they enabled "Linux support" enabled. The library can keep the source "hidden" while doing so.

    This definitely violates GPL's spirit.

    Does this mean that running any XI created with GPLaid source in Windows / Mac / iPhone / PSP3 also violates GPL's sense?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MVP, design question -

excel - Populate list via a bi-Condition -

iphone - How do I make a UIPickerView in a UIActionSheet -