Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 10:57 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> > First sale aside for a moment, GPL is a bare copyright license. When >> > you merely "combine" works, you create compilations, not derivative >> > works. The former is also known as "mere aggregation." Got it now? >> >> Well, apart from the fact that there is no "combining" but >> combining, one should take in account that while in combining you >> are just combining, when you build upon an existing work (aka use a >> library) you're making a derivate. > > In a metaphysical sense, all works are derivatives. But under > copyright law (apart from the GNU Republic), exclusive right to > prepare derivative works doesn't cover compilations. Go read the > legal code, stupid.
You are a bit confused. The question is not whether the whole compilation is a derivative work of its components: it most certainly is. The question is whether the derived part can be considered restricted to the GPLed component, namely that the non-GPLed component is not affected by derivation. For a published API with competing implementations, this won't usually be the case, making the GPL effectively LGPL. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
