Re: GNU License, Again

[Alexander Terekhov]

"Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote:
[...]
> Then you have agreed to the GPL, and you must cause the whole work to
> be under the GPL as per section 2(b).  This has been answered several
> times.

He is merely aggregating his 100% original work with another work 
under the GPL you ueber GNUtian retard. The resulting aggregate 
"work" is usually not creative enough to even fall under copyright. 
But even if it is creative enough, it falls under his own copyright 
on a compilation which is totally separate and independent from 
copyrights on constituent works.

HOUSE REPORT NO. 94-1476: 

----- 
Between them the terms ''compilations'' and ''derivative works'' 
which are defined in section 101 comprehend every copyrightable 
work that employs preexisting material or data of any kind. There 
is necessarily some overlapping between the two, but they basically 
represent different concepts. A ''compilation'' results from a 
process of selecting, bringing together, organizing, and arranging 
previously existing material of all kinds, regardless of whether 
the individual items in the material have been or ever could have 
been subject to copyright [...] an unauthorized translation of a 
novel [i.e. derivative work] could not be copyrighted at all, but 
the owner of copyright in an anthology of poetry [i.e. compilation] 
could sue someone who infringed the whole anthology, even though 
the infringer proves that publication of one of the poems was 
unauthorized. 
----- 

regards,
alexander.