[Fedora-legal-list] What are the implications of a license which is GPL incompatible?

[Richard W.M. Jones]

I've read the FAQ
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#What_does_it_mean_when_a_license_is_listed_as_.22GPLv2_compat.22_or_.22GPLv3_compatible.22.3F
but I'm unclear what it means if a license is *IN*compatible with the
GPL.

As an example, suppose I have a program which is GPLv2+, and it
requires a library which is (for example) APSL2.0.  Is the linking
permitted?  Can I distribute the result as a binary (with an offer of
source) or do end-users have to link it themselves?  Is there a
difference between dynamic and static linking?

More generally about the licenses with "NO" in the GPL* Compat columns
here, what does that stop me from doing?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Software_License_List

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines.  Boot with a
live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into Xen guests.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v