Dynamic linking, was: Re: Dispelling BSD License Misconceptions

[Russ Nelson]

Matthew Flaschen writes:
 > Sticking to the example of readline and Python, part of the code is
 > still specifically written to depend on readline.  I think under Eben's
 > argument, this part would then be a derivative work.  Thus, that part at
 > least should be licensed under the GPL.

Should it be licensed under the GPL before or after it's linked to
readline?  After all, the authors of Python have no control over what
code I actually link it to.  I might link it to readline; I might link
it to lineread, a 100% compatible implementation of readline which is
in the public domain, and which imposes no licensing obligation
whatsoever.

The question here is "Can you copyright an API"?  You can obviously
copyright the description of an API, but can you copyright the API
itself?  Or is it a listing of facts?

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com   | You can do any damn thing
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | you want, as long as you
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | don't expect somebody else
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          | to pick up the pieces.