Re: Recommendation for a CL data structures library

[RJack]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> writes:
>
> > On 3/25/2010 2:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > Hyman Rosen<hyrosen@mail.com>  writes:
> > >
> > > > On 3/25/2010 1:49 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
> > > > > it cannot possibly be correct under copyright law for the 
> > > > > rights to a work to change by the creation of a separate work
> > > > >  after the original work has been created!
> > > > Well, actually, let me take this part back.
> > > What changes is not the rights to the copyrightable work (those 
> > > remain with the author), but whether it legally constitutes an 
> > > integral part of a larger whole or not.  When it can be usefully 
> > > combined with different other parts, this is definitely not the 
> > > case.
> > No, that's not it at all. I was wrong because the author of a 
> > license can put in any conditions he wants,

> The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is 
> extending the rights a user will normally have, so that agreement to
>  the license can be assumed without prejudicing the software user.

The whole point of the GPL as a license rather than a contract is
to establish an alternate, imaginary reality where federal courts
don't universally hold a copyright license to be a contract thus
extending the rights a user will normally have, so that agreement to the
license can be assumed without prejudicing the software user.

It's kind of like extending the structure of frogs so they have wings
and thus don't bump their asses.

> So the GPL takes care not to go further than copyright does.
>
> > But permission to copy and distribute a library cannot affect the 
> > right to copy and distribute a separate work when that work does 
> > not contain the library.
>
> The courts ultimately determine the meaning of "separate" and 
> "contain".
Sincerely,
RJack :)