Derivative/collective works and OSL
jcowan at reutershealth.com
Mon Feb 7 22:55:42 UTC 2005
Michael Poole scripsit:
> At least in the US, a collective work requires that the components be
> "separate and independent works in themselves." If you ship an
> executable that can only run when some library is present, it is
> probably not an independent work.
On that view, large and significant libraries like glibc are not independent
works either. I don't think we can identify independent works with executable
(when compiled) works.
> This is also not necessarily true. Most dynamically linked libraries
> are incorporated by reference in the application that uses them. If
> the only way to satisfiy that reference is by using a GPLed library,
> or if you distribute it with a GPLed library, then the combination
> is perhaps a compilation but not a collective work (as those terms are
> defined in 17 USC 101).
So says the FSF, but does the law back them up? Nobody knows.
Business before pleasure, if not too bloomering long before.
--Nicholas van Rijn
John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
More information about the License-discuss