[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [OctDev] Octave-forge packaging

From: John W. Eaton
Subject: Re: [OctDev] Octave-forge packaging
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:55:16 -0400

On 24-Apr-2005, Paul Kienzle <address@hidden> wrote:

| Whether or not the above is a correct interpretation has AFAIK not been 
| decided.  I happen to disagree with the FSF interpretation. Linking is 
| a completely arbitrary criterion. I could just as easily write the 
| arguments to a file and call a separate program to invoke the function. 
| A memory based filesystem would make this faster.  It should even be 
| possible to write a specialized 'filesystem' which allows one process 
| to access memory from another without a copy, making the overhead 
| almost invisible.

Again, IANAL, but because the GPL uses copyright law, I think the key
question is whether one is creating a derivative work.  It does not
really matter what technical means are employed to create the
derivative.  A court may eventually decide that linking (static,
dynamic, or otherwise) does not create a derivative work.  But until
then, I will stick with the FSF interpretation.


reply via email to

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