On 2/24/07, Abhijit Menon-Sen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BTW, I don't see why static linking "certainly" makes a derivative work. Surely that must be, again, a question of fact, to be decided based on copyright law and the nature of what is being linked to what?
Because in static linking, the binary code is directly included in the executable unlike in dynamic linking in which there are references and the code is used at runtime.
For example, if I write a program that calculates pi and uses printf to report the result, and I statically link it against glibc (for printf), it seems ridiculous to claim that my work is a derivative of glibc. The FSF may want to claim it, but since the GPL defers to copyright law in defining what constitutes a derived work, as you said, their opinion doesn't matter.
Glibc is licensed under LGPL[1]. -- Vinayak [1]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License
