Re: GPL and other licences

[Alexander Terekhov]

GNUtian logic in action.

Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
[...]
> You can combine software to create both a plain compilation and a 
> derived work.

Only in the GNU Republic.

> I shall not try to draw the line, but I'd put my money on there being more
> derived works than you seem to think.

Yeah, I know.

http://web.novalis.org/talks/compliance-for-developers/slide-49.html

[begin textual copying]

July 27, 2004 GPL Compliance for Software Developers Legal notes
----------------------------------------------------------------

Legal notes

Static linking creates a derivative work through textual copying

Most dynamic linking cases involve distributing the library

Still a derivative work:

Dynamic linking

Distributing only the executable (testtriangle)

Still a derivative work:

Distributing the source code of software which links to a library

when that library is the only software to provide that interface

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2004, Free Software Foundation. Verbatim copying
permitted provided this notice is preserved.

[end textual copying]

I suppose that "through textual copying", this message and all 
archives (google's, etc. that now contain and combine it), 
constitute unauthorized (note that only verbatim copying was 
permitted and no right to prepare derivatives was conveyed) 
"derived work" (i.e. "derivative work" under GNU law) of the 
FSF's "legal notes". I've thoroughly contaminated the Internet. 

Oh my bad. 

> 
> > When you print two short stories on the same sheet of paper (or PDF),
> > you're not creating a derivative work.
> 
> Exactly. There is no creative effort on my part in just putting one after
> the other (except perhaps if the selection of stories in itself has artistic 
> merit).
> 
> > And the same goes when you put several
> > pieces of source code under different licenses in one file. Think
> > tarball.
> 
> Intentions matter. Putting things in a tar file is usaually with the
> intention of moving them together. Putting them in the same jar file 
> usually means using them together. 

So what? Copyright protects software as literary works (subject 
to the AFC test). Functional and environmental aspects like "using 
together", address spaces, enclaves, kernel/user space, and etc. 
are all totally irrelevant.

>                                    A jar file can be a single program, 
> combining different works into one derived work.

The copyright law outside the GNU Republic doesn't concern itself 
with "single programs". Whatever that is. It's just a bunch of 
literary works to be used in a computer in order to bring about a 
certain result. And a jar is just an archive (apart from optional 
META-INF), my GNUtian friend.

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/guide/jar/jar.html

regards,
alexander.