Quoting Grahame Grieve (grah...@healthintersections.com.au): > hi Rick > > Everything you say is true, but asking FSF was way cheaper than asking a > judge in a court of law ;-) > I don't have enough money and interest - that's what open source is about, > right?
Well, speaking as someone who has interest but is too cheap to hire an attorney to explain something that's interesting to study independently, I can give you my opinion[1]: o Paraphrasing the San Francisco saying: What GPL FAQ says about derivative works plus $2 will get you a ride on Muni. o Neither 'fork and exec' nor the concept of 'linking' (dynamic or otherwise) is likely to have any particular relevance to a judge deciding whether work B is derivative of work B.q o Judges decide whether a work is derivative of another work by identifying the copyright-eligible creative elements of both, determining whether elements of one have been incorporated into / copied by the other, and whether the copying is substantive as opposed to de minimus. Interesting questions include what a judge will regard as a 'work' as opposed to a collection of works in proximity. But the more of the relevant caselaw you read, the less relevant the GPL FAQ seems -- to this reader. Anyway, consider modifying your page, because IMO you're contributing to the common problem of the aforementioned category error among the general computerist public. [1] I've cleverly not giving you 'legal advice' within the meaning of the unauthorised practice of law statutes by sticking to general discussions of law without purporting to tell you how they apply to your specific legal problem. -- Cheers, Actually, time flies hate a banana. Rick Moen -- Micah Joel r...@linuxmafia.com McQ! (4x80) _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
