Make a straight forward definition of linking (Score 1)

Define a program that is legally linked to GPL as a program that does not use a publically documented (GPL) API. If the program can "envelope" GPL software in a privitised and parasidic way it does not enjoy being covered by a seprate licence. If it communicates through a publically documented and maintained API then it is fine for it to enjoy whatever licence it chooses. Hopefully if it falls into disrepair or is pulled from public distribution having the API will allow anyone who needs to Repair whatever hole is left by it's absence to plug something else in. It seems pretty simple to use an API (or standard) the way MegaSoft does, as a barrier and legal tool. In this case it is a good idea to do so, perhaps even right in the moral sense. It establishes a clearer definition of what is and is not GPL software. This clause might help make a better fence between Free and unfree software allowing them to work togather. It protects corperations from some of the Viral parts of the GPL and protects the GPL from some of the dumb and paracidic behavior and ideas of corperations (hey, its ground water that doesn't smell bad, I bet we can sell it for $1.50 a bottle to yuppies! I've done research there's nothin to it dude! Can you loan me the money to buy the well from the park service before someone else does?) -note to self, think of good sig...