[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GPL traitor !

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: GPL traitor !
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:29:02 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
In the GPL context, 17 USC 117 covers not only dynamic linking but also static linking. I'm talking about distribution of "exact copies [that is, exact copies of the GPL'd stuff statically linked] prepared in accordance with the provisions of this section..."

See 17 USC 117 and CONTU.

There is no difference between static and dynamic linking.

No, this is false. A statically linked program is a collective work
containing separately copyrighted elements. Permission to include an element in a collective work is separate from any other permission one has to use that work:


§ 201. Ownership of copyright ... (c) Contributions to Collective Works. — Copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole, and vests initially in the author of the contribution. In the absence of an express transfer of the copyright or of any rights under it, the owner of copyright in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of reproducing and distributing the contribution as part of that particular collective work, any revision of that collective work, and any later collective work in the same series.

In order to copy and distribute a statically linked program which contains GPLed elements, separate permission is needed for those elements apart from any other permission one might have already. The GPL grants this permission only when the work as a whole is distributed under the GPL.

GPL sec. 2 reads:
 "2. You may *modify* your copy or copies of the Program or any
portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:"

By statutory definition, a compilation does *not* modify a preexisting
work, hence sec. 2 never applies to compilations. So... what section
of the GPL applies to compilations consisting of the preexisting
"separately copyrighted" elements?


reply via email to

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