[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DLL Copyright

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: DLL Copyright
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:39:34 +0200 (CEST)

   Alfred, please, please, PLEASE: the word is not "deriviate", it is
   "*DERIVATIVE*".  It comes from the verb "derive", passing through
   the noun "derivation", leading to the adjective "derivatiVE".

Thanks, though I'm fully aware of the fact, my fingers are not. :-)

   Alexander T understands full well about the difference between
   "mere aggregation" and "derivative works".  It's been explained
   often enough to him, and he's certainly intelligent enough to
   understand.  He's also admitted that he trolls this group as a
   hobby.  As trolls go, he's a fairly friendly cuddly sort, so feed
   him a little if you like, but not too much.

That I know too, but I am a naive person and I hope that Alexander
will one day get a clue if one beats him hard enough.

   >    In fact, not everything in the Linux kernel is under the GPL.

   > To comply with the GNU GPL, everything in Linux must be licensed
   > under the GNU GPL, as stated by the GNU GPL.  See section 2.

   Incidentally, I just saw on Groklaw that Daniel Wallace has had yet
   another claim (this time against IBM and RedHat) dismissed.  He
   didn't manage to allege that IBM/RedHat had done anything which
   violated the law, even after amending his complaint twice.  I
   wonder how much these escapades have cost him.

I suspect that he will go bankrupt.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]