Re: More GPL questions

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> 
> > Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
> > [...]
> >> Once you start transforming it through compilers and linkers the
> >> picture might change, depending on how much of the library is included
> >> in the transformed source code. If, for example, you execute 'cc -E',
> >> the resulting source code will contain the whole of "stdio.h", and as
> >> such it's now most definitely something that is affected by the stdio.h
> >> copyright (I leave it to Alexander to define if it's a derivative work,
> >> a compilation, or anything he wishes).
> >
> > Mechanical transformation never create derivative works.
> 
> Sure, but we are not talking about "mechanical transformation", but
> mechanical _combination_.  "cc -E" _includes_ stdio.h and other stuff.

Whatever, retard.

> 
> > Legally it's just copying of the original expression without
> > transforming/modifying creativity resulting in a derivative work. So
> > your 'cc -E' would simply "mere aggregate" (in GNU speak) original
> > protected expression from multiple separate and independent works
> > just like tar (same files tar'ed) would do it (legal effect is the
> > same).
> 
> In Terekhov-Lala-land.  "Aggregation" is not a term used for creating
> a functional unit with inseparable components.

Inseparable as in what? Man oh man. Ever heard of postmortem analysis 
of core dumps, idiot?

regards,
alexander.