On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:12:29 +0100, Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That depends on how the program has been created and other details. If a > program uses the ISO-standardized C library API, and uses no components > of a particular C library while it is being created, then a derivative > work of the program and a particular C library is created the moment the > program is run (and therefore linked with the library). But I can also > imagine different circumstances under which a derivative work is already > created when the programm is written.
Taking two works and pasting them together does not create a derivative work, but instead creates some kind of compilation, most likely a collective work. If there is no recasting, transforming or adaptation of the original work, then I don't think the result fits the statutory definition. However a collective work is separate combinations collected into a whole which seems to accurately describe linking to a library for at least some linking technologies. For static linked works, the diference between a derivative work and a collective work is usually meaningless because distribution requires the distributing the library. But the difference is critical if the two joined works are to be distributed separately. The case law arising from third party game console emulators and third party games for game consoles seems to support the proposition that linking (dynamically) to other peoples code does not create a derivative work even. Isaac _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
