[sldev] Proprietary dependencies

Argent Stonecutter secret.argent at gmail.com
Sat Jan 26 15:56:58 PST 2008


On 2008-01-26, at 16:53, Lawson English wrote:
> That last is where the whole thing gets silly (if it isn't  
> already). What it means is that it is OK to ship a product that  
> won't work properly (if at all) on a specific system unless it  
> violates a license, and if a person happens to have QuickTime  
> already installed (as many do), the fact Second Life is working  
> properly means that he person has unknowingly violated a license.

I think you're misinterpreting what I wrote. If you build SL against  
Quicktime on Windows, you are creating a derivative work of BOTH the  
GPLed SL code and Apple's Quicktime for Windows. Whether Quicktime is  
installed on the destination or not, the GPL does not give you the  
right to redistribute that derivative work. On OSX this is not a  
problem because the GPL explicitly contains an exception for  
components shipped as a standard part of the host operating system.

> I think the guiding light there is the fact that Linden Labs, which  
> holds the license in the first place, is already in violation of  
> their own license (according to you),

Linden Labs is not distributing their compiled code under the GPL. If  
the open source client did not exist, Linden Labs would still have  
the right to distribute their own code under whatever terms they  
want. It's only third parties that are constrained by the GPL here.



More information about the SLDev mailing list