dual licensing for libbusybox

[Rob Landley]

On Thursday 02 March 2006 2:43 pm, David Seikel wrote:
> > Nothing in the GPL grants people the right to produce a derivative
> > work that isnt distributed. Its just that you havent violated the
> > licence untill you distribute. Its not a right, its somthing thats not
> > forbidden.
>
> Kinda makes the entire "dynamic linking produces a derived work" sound
> a little silly.  Means I am in violation of GPL unless I distribute the
> in memory copy of a running program that is dynamically linked to a GPL
> library.  IANAL, and it's way past my bed time, so I'm probably raving
> insensibly.

Fair use, time shifting, archival copies, first sale doctrine, uniform 
commercial code...

It's not that simple.

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.