gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: GPL traitor !


From: Hadron
Subject: Re: GPL traitor !
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 15:42:01 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.90 (gnu/linux)

Tim Smith <address@hidden> writes:

> In article <address@hidden>,
>  JEDIDIAH <address@hidden> wrote:
>>     No, the question is whether or not code that is entirely dependent
>> on some other person's work for it's existence is a derivative work. This
>> question doesn't magically go away just because you take the GPL out of
>> the picture.
>
> The question of whether or not a work is "dependent on" someone else's 
> work doesn't even arise, because the relationship "dependent on" is not 
> a relationship that has any meaning in copyright law.
>
> This is one of the reasons companies making video game consoles have to 
> use technological means to prevent unauthorized games from being 
> released for their systems, rather than simply suing unauthorized 
> produces for copyright violation.  After all, the games are dependent on 
> the operating system in the game console, so by your logic (and the 
> FSF's logic), you have to have permission to release the games.
>
> They initially did try the copyright approach, and fell flat on their 
> faces in court, because the games were not derivative works of the game 
> console's code.  Hence, the companies had to switch to code signing, or 
> using patented mechanical interfaces for their cartridges, so they could 
> nail unauthorized cartridge makers for patent infringement.
>
>>     If you tried to use this sort of rationale to argue that you can
>> freely make Star Trek novels, you would probably get your ass handed 
>> to you.
>
> Writing a Star Trek novel would involve copying characters, settings, 
> and such from the existing Star Trek works.  Hence, it would run into 
> copyright problems.  (Gee...copying leads to copyright problems...who 
> would have expected that?).
>
> Writing source code that can call functions from a library does not 
> involve copying the library.  There might be some copying of structure 
> definitions for the interface, but those are functional elements of the 
> library that are not subject to copyright.

Where's the GPL's answer to Ian "hired gun" Hilliard, Alan McKenzie, with
his "everyone understand the GPL" line?

-- 
In view of all the deadly computer viruses that have been spreading
lately, Weekend Update would like to remind you: when you link up to
another computer, you’re linking up to every computer that that
computer has ever linked up to. — Dennis Miller


reply via email to

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