Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?

[Ciaran O'Riordan]

Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
> It is interesting to note that compiling the source code of standard
> program packages of independently authored c code (and assembler) like
> the Linux kernel does not create a derivative work.

Correct, or more precisely, does not *necessarily* create a derivative work.

Whether X is a derivative of Y is determined at time of writing, not at time
of linking or compiling.

> If I compile my extra, independently authored c code into the Linux
> source tree I create a new collective work not a new derivative work.

If by "independently authored" you mean that you didn't write it to work
with Linux, then your work might indeed not be a derivative work.

For example, if you sang a song, recorded it, and put it into the Linux
kernel source as your start-up sound, then that wouldn't automatically be
GPL'd, AFAICT.  That would be a simple amalgamation, even if the final
output might all be in the one file.

But if you looked at Linux, decided the scheduler was crap, and then wrote a
completely new scheduler for Linux, then that would be a derivative work,
AFAICT.  Whether you link or compile it all together, or whether you output
one file or multiple, wouldn't be a deciding factor, AFAIK.

-- 
Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/

Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.org

Recent blog entries:
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/links_gnu_osm_gnewsense_bangalore
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/japanese_pdfs_part_2_xetex
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/links_translation_bsod_orwell_releases
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/fsfe_meeting_tonight_in_brussels_thurs_7th