[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: More GPL questions
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: More GPL questions |
Date: |
Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:49:53 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:
> On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:51:48 +0200
> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:
>
>> > An original program in source code format, and contains function
>> > and/or system calls does not consist of "revisions, annotations,
>> > elaborations or other modifications" to the libraries or the OS.
>>
>> Sigh. But a literary work consisting of annotations does not contain
>> material from the original work. It is, as a whole, an original work
>> of authorship.
>
> You cannot "annotate, revise, elaborate or otherwise modify" without
> anything of the original work.
I have here a secondary literary work covering "Ulysses", consisting
pretty much exclusively of annotations. Where there are citations,
they are short enough not to count as copyrightable in itself. But it
certainly is a derivative work.
> Programs that use a library or an OS are not "revisions,
> annotations, elaborations or other modifications" of the library or
> the OS.
Naturally. So one has to translate the examples from the context of
literary works to that of computer programs.
>> > It's a wholly new work. It contains _no_ code from the libraries
>> > or the OS, and thus it cannot be a derivative work.
>>
>> But in the literary case, exactly that does _not_ hold, according
>> to the letter of the law.
>
> In the specific case of "annotations, revisions, elaborations and
> other modifications", which supposes that there is a work that is
> revised, annotated, elaborated or otherwise modified". Are you
> claiming that all programs are modifications, elaborations,
> revisions and annotations of the OS and the libraries?
I am not claiming any such thing. I am just saying that the lack of
direct verbatim inclusion of a copyrightable amount of material is not
a necessity in the explanation for literary works, and so it is not
obvious why it would have to be a necessary criterion in the case of
software.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Re: More GPL questions, (continued)
- Re: More GPL questions, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, David Kastrup, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, David Kastrup, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, David Kastrup, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: More GPL questions, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, John Hasler, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, John Hasler, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, David Kastrup, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, David Kastrup, 2006/10/17
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/18
- Re: More GPL questions, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/10/17