On 8/6/06, Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I disagree; I do not believe the GPL can cover dynamic linking. Dynamic linking is mapping two separate binary objects into memory and overlaying runtime-generated references based on a common interface of string symbol names, *NOT* producing any kind of combined object file on disk.
In the general case, the mechanical details of the system (including issues like dynamic linking or other modularity related issues) are irrelevant to copyright. It's the work of art that matters to copyright, not the mechanical details. And the working application is either a work of art, or copyright does not apply to it. That said, in specific cases those mechanical details are evidence about author intent and about the nature of the work, and:
I can certainly say that I, as the copyright holder of Live-F1, will never claim a licence breach for the code being dynamically linked to non-GPL code through a publically defined interface[1].
This kind of statement addresses at least some of the potential issues.
Probably also worth pointing out that users may not even have the right to use Live-F1, as the data it manipulates is under unclear licence terms. I haven't yet had a knock on the door from Bernie's lawyers, but that's not necessarily telling.
But this kind of statement indicates that at least some potential issues might not be addressed. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]