Is inherited class a derivative work?

[Randy Kramer]

I find this thread interesting, and hope that when some consensus is
reached (or the thead dies down and there is perhaps an "agreement to
disagree") that someone can summarize the areas of consensus and
disagreement for a layman.  (Perhaps the best resting place for
something like that is on a wiki -- if someone else writes a summary I
would be happy to host it on my TWiki.)

I am not a lawyer, and have not read this thread with enough
understanding to make any comments except the following:

Michael Beck wrote:
> Since java.util.Dictionary is an abstract class, and you override abstract
> methods, I agree with you. By having abstract methods in a class, IMHO the
> author gives the user implicitly the right to create a subclass and override the
> abstract methods.

Re: "IMHO the author gives the user implicitly the right to create a
subclass and override the abstract methods."

I'm not so sure -- creating abstract methods is useful for the original
version of the program, to be overridden by derived classes in the
original.  Simply the presence of abstract classes does not mean that
the author intends for others to also derive from those classes.  (IMHO,
and in my limited knowledge of C++).

Randy Kramer
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3