[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL
From: |
Rjack |
Subject: |
Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:21:59 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) |
Hyman Rosen wrote:
Rjack wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote:
No, it's copyright holders exercising their right to control
how their works may be copied and distributed.
cite to the statutes
17 USC 106 ยง 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works Subject
to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this
title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the
following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or
phonorecords; (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the
copyrighted work; ...
When someone creates a program which includes another's
copyrighted work, they are forbidden to make and distribute
copies by 17 USC 106 (1), and so must obtain authorization from
the rights holder to do so.
Section 1 of the GPL allows such copying:
"1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any
warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of
this License along with the Program."
It does not matter whether the new work is a derivative of the
old;
OH YES IT DOES MATTER HYMEN.
if copies of the copyrighted code are incorporated into the new
work, as they are when programs are statically linked, making and
distributing these copies must be authorized.
They are. See the GPL section 1 (supra).
The GPL grants such permission, provided that the new work in its
entirety is licensed under the GPL.
BALONEY. What you want to do is chaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaange a mere
aggregation into a derivative work.
There you go again -- mooooooooooooooooooooooving the goalposts.
Sincerely,
Rjack :)
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, (continued)
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/19
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Rjack, 2009/03/20
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL,
Rjack <=
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Hyman Rosen, 2009/03/23
- Re: IBM doesn't like the GPL, Alexander Terekhov, 2009/03/23