[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?
From: |
Barry Margolin |
Subject: |
Re: GPL 2(b) HUH? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:07:14 -0400 |
User-agent: |
MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) |
In article <vl7Ak.413$686.276@fe101.usenetserver.com>,
Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
> Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> > But if you looked at Linux, decided the scheduler was crap, and then wrote a
> > completely new scheduler for Linux, then that would be a derivative work
>
> No, it would not. By statute, in the U.S., a derivative work is a
> transformation of another work which retains its original purpose -
A new version of Linux with a different scheduler serves the same
purpose: they're both operating system kernels.
> turning a short story into a movie script, or translating into a
> different language. See the Harry Potter case, where the judge said
> that turning narratives into a reference text, even with massive
> copying from the original sources, does not make the reference text
> a derivative work of the novels, because the reference does not serve
> the same purpose as the novels even though it is a transformation of
> them.
I think the real-world analogy to the scenario Ciaran described would be
if you took the Harry Potter text, removed a chapter, and replaced it
with a new chapter that you wrote. What would the status of the
resulting book be? Is it a derivative of the original Harry Potter, or
a compilation of the originnal chapters (minus 1) and the new chapter?
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
- GPL 2(b) HUH?, Rjack, 2008/09/16
- Message not available
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?,
Barry Margolin <=
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/17
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/18
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/19
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Ben Pfaff, 2008/09/19
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/09/20
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Barry Margolin, 2008/09/20
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, John Hasler, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Rjack, 2008/09/21
- Re: GPL 2(b) HUH?, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/21