On Tuesday 16 October 2001 03:22 pm, Michael Beck wrote:
> I just got a response from FSF lawyers stating that "inheritance is
> considered modifying the library" (see below). My question was related to
> releasing code under LGPL and wanted to make sure that I've interpreted
> correctly the diff
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Lawrence E. Rosen wrote:
> While the FSF *may* be correct, I would expect a more thorough analysis
> of the situation from them before I accept their conclusion. In
> particular, how does inheritance differ in a substantive and legally
> significant way from traditional subro
I've been watching the exchange on this topic with interest.
The mere statement from the FSF that "inheritance is considered
modifying the library, so subclasses of library classes must be released
under the LGPL" is of little legal significance or value. I, for one,
don't think it is at all o
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 00:19
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is inherited class a derivative work?
>
> That said, inherited classes are not derivative of the base
> classes. Ther
Abe Kornelis writes:
> 2) In the paragraph numbered 5, Motosoto chooses
>dutch law as the applicable law, but they retain
>the statement about jury trial. Now, I'm not
>a lawyer, but I do happen to be dutch and to
>*my* (admittedly limited) knowledge, juries
>do not exist
5 matches
Mail list logo