Fedor Zuev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>>I thought I'd been following this discussion, but it seems to have >>branched off into a discussion of originality. Unless I'm horribly >>confused (which, as always, is possible) originality is absolutely >>irrelevant to the Sun RPC code, because work derived from it is, >>well, derived from it, and therefore clearly not original. (If I >>am confused, I'd personally appreciate a recap that would explain >>the connection, as I've gone back and reread the past few messages >>and the connection is still opaque to me.) [snip] > One can argue, that separation of SUN RPC from GLIBS do not > contribute enough (any) originality to constitute creation of new > original work of authorship. If that is the case, the license could claim that you must commit ritual suicide and the work would still be free. But I don't think it would be a good idea for Debian to depend on the work not being copyrightable when clearly Sun thinks it is. >>2) If the answer to (1) is no, is that restriction compatible with >> the GPL? > > Maybe. > > GPL defines "work based on the Program" twice: > > First, it clearly refers to "derivative work under copyright > law" > > ---------------------- > The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, > and a "work based on the Program" means either the Program or any > derivative work under copyright law. > ---------------------- > > Second, it refer only to "modify" itself > > ---------------------- > You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any > portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy > and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section > 1 above > ---------------------- > > Under first definition, all OK. Under second - maybe not. I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say here. -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
