John Cowan wrote:
[...]
> computer scientist (HINAL)
http://www.digital-law-online.com/lpdi1.0/treatise2.html
[...]
> Added material is not itself a derivative work of the GPL'd
> thing, obviously. A binary, however, which combines them into
> a single object, probably is.
I don't think so. I think that source code and the object code
are just different forms of the same copyrighted work. I think
that neither static nor dynamic linking constitutes creation of
derivative work. Finally, I personally think that all those FSF
myths ("incompatible licenses", etc.) are laughable and won't
stand in court.
regards,
alexander.
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
