Rahul Dhesi wrote:
I did not find the phrase "derivative work" in the GPL v3 text. I found it in v2, but you are discussing v3, are you not? If so, it would be better to stick to the language in GPL v3.
I am discussing the GPL in general. The power the GPL gets over a work as a whole comes from copyright law. Therefore, we must discuss when the GPL can acquire such power. When a program is linked dynamically against a GPLed library, the program does not contain a copy of the library. Thus, the only way that the program might fall under the power of the GPL is if the program could be considered a derivative work of the library. That term, "derivative work", comes from copyright law. But a work is a derivative work of another only if it is transformed version of that work representing a significant work of authorship, which is manifestly not the case for a program using a library. Therefore the license of the library is immaterial to how the program which uses it may be distributed, and so a program may dynamically link to a GPLed library without that alone causing the program to fall under the GPL. For Java, where there is no static linking, that means GPLed class files may be used in non-Free Software "programs" (that in quotes because a Java program is an assemblage of class files, not a unified whole). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
