Clarification of GPL

[Mahesh T. Pai]

Alexander Terekhov said on Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 07:06:40PM +0100,:

 > Now replace "kernel" with SysV UNIX and GPL with 
 > "confidential" (OCO or something like that). How nice. 

I consider this as a bug with the law - silliness of treating programs
as analogous to `literary, artistic and dramatic works' as I find from
the treaties,  and the  Indian law. AFAIK,  at least few  EU countries
treat  the too treat  software as  a part  of the  category `literary,
dramatic and artistic' work.

The  situation is  this -  I have  program X,  and you  wrote  Y which
depends on  X. `Derivative  work' in traditional  copyright law  was a
work which modified X. Here, though  Y is depending on X; and will not
work without X, (a plug  in; kernel loadable module) traditionally, it
ought to be treated as an independent work.

The nearest analogy from literature I  can think of at the moment is X
being a  grammar text book and  Y my essay, which  conforms to grammar
in that text book. Is my essay a derivative of the grammar book?

But,  in  computer programs,  the  analogy  will  not hold  good;  and
therefore,  the law  is  buggy.  Why waste  bandwidth  trying to  work
within the framework of buggy laws? We should try to change the law.

But that is work for another list ...
 
-- 
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
                                          
  Mahesh T. Pai, LL.M.,                   
  'NANDINI', S. R. M. Road,               
  Ernakulam, Cochin-682018,               
  Kerala, India.                          
                                          
  http://in.geocities.com/paivakil         
                                          
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3