11
There is uncertainty about whether or not dynamic linking makes a derivative work and thus engages the GPL (pro, con). But reading the python module's README, it seems to me that the developers have already thought carefully about this.
Although pdf2image does use poppler, it only uses two commands, which it invokes through userspace ("A python module ...
5
You are only allowed to use the code and distribute it and its derivatives under the GPL unless you have permission of all authors to re-license it. That is true for a part of the code, too: deleting one half does not make the remaining half magically something not derived from the whole. A license applies to each line of code unless it says otherwise ...
2
Going by what you quote, you only need to worry about the binary being subject to gpl license under Linux. Even under Linux you could use and distribute in a version without the mentioned library compiled into the library: it is a dependency which can be part but need not be, so you could use version without that library compiled into it). And if you choose ...
1
I'll answer these in reverse order because the second one is easier:
can a language "itself" fall under the GPL independent of any concrete implementation?
No. The GPL derives its legal power from copyright law, and copyright covers only the expression of an idea. The reference specification of a language can certainly be under the GPL (although the GPL ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
