Assistance/advice in choosing a license for POV-Ray 4.0

[Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.]

I agree that the quoted answer below makes a lot of intuitive sense and, 
ultimately, the conclusion may prove to be correct, but that would be 
fortuitous.  Whether the vendor's code works just fine is not the correct 
legal analysis.  To increase the likelihood that ab answer to this complex 
question has a basis in law (and not pure speculation) I think we have to 
refrain from highly abstract comments about the interaction between an 
undefined modification of an open source codebase.  It may help if someone 
prosed a specific (but very brief, please) example of an allegedy 
permissible or infringing use.

- Rod

"If the vendor's code fetches the GPL'ed component without the end-users' 
intervention, and if the vendor's code will not run without it, then the 
vendor's code is probably a derivative work and the behavior you've 
described 
would be violating the GPL.

On the other hand, if the vendor's code works just fine by itself, but it 
provides an optional mechanism for the end-user to download additional 
components, then the vendor is not violating the GPL.  If the combination 
of 
the vendor code and the GPLed component does not fall within the terms of 
the 
GPL, then the end-user may not redistribute the combination."


------------
Rod Dixon
www.cyberspaces.org

...... Original Message .......
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 11:22:32 -0500 Chuck Swiger <chuck at codefab.com> wrote:
>If the vendor's code fetches the GPL'ed component without the end-users' 
>intervention, and if the vendor's code will not run without it, then the 
>vendor's code is probably a derivative work and the behavior you've 
described 
>would be violating the GPL.
>
>On the other hand, if the vendor's code works just fine by itself, but it 
>provides an optional mechanism for the end-user to download additional 
>components, then the vendor is not violating the GPL.  If the combination 
of 
>the vendor code and the GPLed component does not fall within the terms of 
the 
>GPL, then the end-user may not redistribute the combination.
>
>