On 25/06/11 13:50 -0500, Michael Hipp wrote:
> On 6/25/2011 11:32 AM, Cédric Krier wrote:
> >All is about derivative work and not about the technical details.
> >Here is a text that explains how it is not logical and even absurd to define
> >derivative work based on technical point of view (especially the plugin and
> >object parts).
> >
> >     http://www.law.washington.edu/lta/swp/law/derivative.html
> 
> Thanks, good read. This sentence in the conclusion does stand out
> somewhat: "the drafters of the GPL urge a generally expansive
> definition of derivative work." This isn't likely a surprise to
> anyone.
> 
> I don't yet know much about Tryton, but to me it looks like a
> library and calls itself a framework which arguably isn't much
> different from a library. I guess I was really wondering if the
> authors of Tryton were using an interpretation of GPL that treated
> it like a library, where others could freely link to it or makes
> calls to it without becoming a derivative work.

As I already said, the definition of derivative work can not be defined with a
technical point of view.

> (Obviously any
> changes to the Tryton code itself would have to be published.)

It is not mandatory to publish any of your code even if it is in Tryton
it-self.

-- 
Cédric Krier

B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Email/Jabber: [email protected]
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

Attachment: pgp8v5lIEDPV1.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to