[License-review] For Approval: Scripting Free Software License, Version 1.3.6 (S-FSL v1.3.6)

Elmar Stellnberger estellnb at gmail.com
Sat Nov 16 11:17:14 UTC 2013


Thanks for that addition. Sounds very logical to me.
Yes, I think I have heard it once too: interfaces are definitely not 
protected by copyright law.


Am 14.11.2013 20:12, schrieb Chuck Swiger:
> On Nov 12, 2013, at 5:09 AM, Elmar Stellnberger <estellnb at elstel.org> wrote:
>>> "Derived works" in copyright (and OSD) corresponds roughly to:
>>> a) maybe certain "patches", but definitely NOT all;
>>> b) "branches", the way your text uses the term, likely.
>> Yes, everything that is derived from an initial work is a derived work.
> This assumption is not always correct, because not all components of the original work are protectable by copyright.
>
> In particular, software APIs are generally not protectable-- c.f. Computer Associates v. Altai-- which is why one can swap out GNU readline (originally written by Brian Fox in 1994) for a BSD-licensed readline library (written by Jaromir Dolecek for NetBSD in 1997) or the libedit library (written by Christos Zoulas for 4.4BSD back in 1992).
>
> A program which can use GNU readline (or BSD readline, or even no readline library at all) does not become a derivative work of the readline library it links against.
>
> Regards,




More information about the License-review mailing list