Fedora Freedom and linux-libre

[Les Mikesell]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
>> If it's silly, then you shouldn't have any problem showing where it is
>> executed as part of "the Program",
> 
> Execution is irrelevant, because copyright law doesn't apply to this
> act.

Does that mean you disagree with the FSF claim that it is not permitted 
to distribute non-GPL'd software that dynamically links to unique 
libraries only available under the GPL?  And the GPL's 'work as a whole' 
concept doesn't apply to the running program?  If it is actually 
permissible to deliver any combination of components separately under 
different licenses with tools to combine them at run time, then the GPL 
is not nearly as harmful as I've believed.

> It is *distributed* as part of the program, and that's what copyright
> law restricts by default. 

Which is irrelevant if you have permission to distribute all parts.  It 
is only the weirdness of the GPL denying the right to distribute under 
many conditions that even makes this a question.

> And it's distributed as inseparable part of
> the program while at that.

I don't see how you can say it is inseparable when the firmware 
downloader understands the separation perfectly - and nothing else 
really needs to.  Or that it's a part of the program since it gets 
installed on different hardware - except maybe for the CPU microcode.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com