@ 12/05/2004 16:36 : wrote Humberto Massa :
metagcc.patch is a derived work of your metagcc, which is a derived work
of both gcc and metafont, so you cannot distribute metagcc.patch unless
it satisfies the terms of gcc's license and metafont's license.
Even if that is not the case, wouldn't this script constitute
"contributory infringement"?
I changed my mind about this. No, even in the USofA, it's not
contributory infringement because the script is not helping *me* to
*distribute* undistributable works. It may even be undistributable by
itself, or metagcc.patch can be undistributable, but having the script
and the patch, an user who runs the script is *NOT* *AT* *ALL*
infringing on anybody's copyrights.
The user would be just repeating the steps I did _before_ I infringed by
putting the patch in someplace it could get it. It can have no legal
right to use the patch, but... hmm... no, I don't think there is a
problem there.
But yes, you DO have a point. Or two.
maybe only one, but credit where it's due.
--
br,M
