What is Copyleft?

Dave J Woolley david.woolley at bts.co.uk
Mon Feb 26 11:52:11 UTC 2001

> From:	Ryan S. Dancey [SMTP:ryand at frpg.com]
> The function prototypes in header files almost certainly cannot be
> copyrighted, thus there's no point in licensing their use.  In fact, you
> can
> almost always call an exported function by ordinal number, thus I wouldn't
> even have to include the actual function names in my non-licensed code; I
> could just call the functions by ordinal rather than by name.
	The LGPL explicitly discusses this case, saying that a derivative
	work may not exist, but even if it does, providing that the worst
	you do is include 10 line inline subroutines, they will not impose
	restrictions.  So, for most normal cases, the unlinked object case
	doesn't require a license or gets an unrestricted one.

> In my opinion, not a derivative work, because the parts are never combined
> into one work.  In my opinion, from the standpoint of making a work a
> derivative work, the law does not understand or care about the concept of
> a
	There is part of the wording of clause 5 that might be taken to
	read that 6 should apply to a dynamically linked executable, even
	if it is not a derivative work.  I believe they can say that 
	inputting the dynamic library to the linker is restricted even if
	none of it comes out.



--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.

More information about the License-discuss mailing list