Hyman Rosen <hyro...@mail.com> writes: > On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> Hyman Rosen<hyro...@mail.com> writes: >> >>> On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote: >>>> it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the >>>> rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate >>>> work after the original work has been created! >>> >>> Well, actually, let me take this part back. >> >> What changes is not the rights to the copyrightable work (those remain >> with the author), but whether it legally constitutes an integral part of >> a larger whole or not. When it can be usefully combined with different >> other parts, this is definitely not the case. > > No, that's not it at all. I was wrong because the author > of a license can put in any conditions he wants,
The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is extending the rights a user will normally have, so that agreement to the license can be assumed without prejudicing the software user. So the GPL takes care not to go further than copyright does. > But permission to copy and distribute a library cannot > affect the right to copy and distribute a separate work > when that work does not contain the library. The courts ultimately determine the meaning of "separate" and "contain". -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
