Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: [...] > > External factors are totally irrelevant. Copyright is about expression, > > not dependencies. No MS DirectX program can function without MS DirectX > > (broken and incomplete WINE stuff aside for a moment), but that doesn't > > make DirectX programs derivative works of DirectX. > > If they are unable to function without including DirectX in their memory > segment, becoming one single program, then they _are_ in fact a > derivative.
Only in the GNU Republic (whatever "one single program" means in the GNU Republic). > > It's like a book that is unreadable without adding the pages from > another book. Likewise (whatever "unreadable" means in the GNU Republic). > > DirectX's license certainly allows linking said software with other > licenses or it wouldn't be used at all. Uh, you made me waste half a gig of bandwidth to download the SDK. Guess what? MICROSOFT SOFTWARE LICENSE TERMS for MICROSOFT DIRECTX SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT say nothing about linking. regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
