Re: [!NEWS] The GNUtards Must Be Crazy

[Doug Mentohl]

Rjack wrote:

> The GPL attempts in sec. 2(b) to regulate the distribution of derivative works "in 
> rem" with a contract -- which is equivalent to formulating a new copyright law under 
> state common law.

'The risk, however, is vastly overstated. The GPL doesn’t use the word 
“combination.” It uses the phrase “contains or is derived from.” These 
terms have very specific meanings under copyright law that effectively 
reduce the reach of the GPL to a licensee's own code'

http://www.rosenlaw.com/html/GPL.PDF