[H-GEN] GPL question

Anthony Towns aj at azure.humbug.org.au
Mon Jan 5 23:10:33 EST 2004


On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 12:55:54PM +1000, Paul Gearon wrote:
> Now derivation is an interesting point.  The GPL *does* mention deriving 
> your work from GPLed code (section 2 refers to this).  However, wouldn't 
> section 0 be the first consideration here?  

If foo is a derived work of libgpl, then you're not allowed to make
copies of it and distribute them unless you comply with the GPL.

> Again, it says: "Activities 
> other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by 
> this License; they are outside its scope." 

Right -- but if foo is a derived work of libgpl, then you have to treat it
the same way you'd treat "libgpl.so.2.0.0".

> So isn't it true that if the 
> "derivation" does not involve copying, distribution, or modification, 
> then the GPL will not apply?

Which is to say, whatever you've derived (libgpl version 2, or
/usr/bin/foo) can only be distributed/copied under the terms of the GPL.

The actual *derivation* is okay though -- you can write foo, or libglp
v2 on your computer and *not* distribute it without caring about the
GPL at all.

(Whether foo is _actually_ a derived work of libgpl is still arguable, of
course)

> In contrast, dynamic linking does not require copying, modification, nor 
> distribution.

The other argument that's worth considering is that the "dynamic linking"
restriction is occassionally a useful thing to encourage software to be
licensed a little more freely. The FSF are loathe to lose any leverage
for creating more free software, and I'm at least leery. You probably
won't find any *really* thorough and satisfying explanations of this
issue because of that though, IMO.

Hrm, I wonder. Suppose free software advocates develop enough political
leverage to get the DMCA and such off the books; given the choice, would
we then want to get our politicians to enshrine the GPL's viralness,
or just keep weakening copyright protection?

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj at humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

               Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.humbug.org.au/pipermail/general/attachments/20040106/0cec97a2/attachment.sig>


More information about the General mailing list