>[...]
>> Including the entire original would clearly make it a derivative work.
>
>A *modified* original is clearly a derivative work. But the scope
>of that derivative work doesn't encompass independent code merely
>aggregated with that derivative work. It's a compilation of a
>derivative work (modified original) and other independent (in the
>copyright sense) computer program works.
A context diff between two files where enough changes had been made
to include the entire original is, to me, not "mere aggregation".
The original certainly isn't usable in the form that it is. (Neither
is the modified original obtained from using the patch on the
unmodified original). It's not like taking the original and the
modified version and sticking them together in a tar or cpio archive.
A patch is something that lets you take the original file (normally
not distributed as part of the patch) and create from it a modified
original. If it doesn't make changes to the original, there's no point
in having a patch.
Gordon L. Burditt
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
