[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:08:46 +0100

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include
>  > works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to
>  > the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
> However, a linked executable which includes a library of Apacahe-licensed
> code does not fall under the above exception. That work does not merely
> link to the interfaces of the covered work, it actually includes a copy
> of it. Therefore such an executable is a Derivative Work under the meaning
> of the Apache license, and the following applies:

Hyman stop being utter idiot. The process of static linking DOESN'T
CREATE AN ORIGINAL WORK OF AUTHORSHIP (same as with dynamic linking). A
linked executable is uncopyrightable aggregation (same as dynamically
linked program in address space/memory) of linked works ("mere
aggregation" in GNU speak) and it doesn't fall under Apache "Derivative

(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

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