Nearly a year after the Free Software Foundation released an updated version of the General Public License - the GPLv3 - there appears to be a great deal of confusion about what the license actually means, if one goes by two recent publications.
Full story »
Similar stories
Categories
Best karma users
FSDaily's Web servers and hosting by DomainGurus
Popular this week - Legal
- 25Novell's Petition for Writ of Certiorari - as text
- 25Apple's Patent Attack
- 23Day 5 of the SCO v. Novell Trial and Some Help for Journalists Covering the Trial
- 22Week 2, Day 6 of SCO v. Novell Trial - The Mistrial Motion, Kim Madsen
- 22MS Brings MPEG-LA-LA Land to the Web & Threatens GNU/Linux With Software Patent Lawsuits
akf
1 year 40 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago
akf
A good article. But one thing seems to be wrong. I don't have a link, but I have read an article where Eben Moglen (coauthor of GPLv3) makes clear, that there is no legal difference between static linking or dynamic linking in the GPL. There is a difference in the LGPL, but not in the GPL.