Re: Use of GPL'd code with proprietary programs

[Martin Dickopp]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> Martin Dickopp wrote:
> [...]
>> dump of a dynamically linked program would be considered a derivative
>> work of both the program and the library is true 
>
> It's not true.

What is not true?  What I really said, or the completely different
statement you made of it by quoting only a part of the sentence?

What do you hope to gain from misrepresenting my statement, given that
anyone can check the archive to find out what I really said?

> A dump is not a derivative.

Who said it is?

For the record, I said: "The fact that I believe a memory dump of a
dynamically linked program would be considered a derivative work of both
the program and the library is true irrespectively of whether that is
actually done."  Pay special attention to the words "I believe".  I
don't claim to *know* how courts may decide in the future, I just state
how I believe they will decide.

The statement also happens to be true.  It would be quite foolish of you
to claim otherwise, since you cannot know what I believe.

Martin