Stefaan A Eeckels wrote: [...] > It is indeed the opionion of > the FSF that any form of linking (static, dynamic, or whatever > technology brings us next) makes the resulting binary a > derivative work of both programs. While this is perfectly > true in case of static linking,
This is perfectly false in case of static linking as well. The distiction between derivative works and compilations is not that hard to grasp. Statically linked executable is a mere aggregation of a bunch of preexisting works. It is the same as an archive containing same bunch of dynamically linked components. > where the binary contains > transformations of both programs, it is far less clear that What "transformations" are you talking about? Software is protected as literary works and binary form is equivalent of source code as far as copyright law is concerned. As for FSF's FAQ/"legal notes"/etc., that silly stuff reflects the state of affairs in the GNU Republic only... where "free" means "free as in bombs": http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/freeasinbombs regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
