On 11/26/2012 08:29 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
Well, dlopen'ed modules/plugins aren't directly linked, i.e. there is
only an indirect dependency. AFAICT (IANAL), this is what makes the
legal key-difference.
IANAL either, but neither is what matters in the legal sense; "derived
work" is what matters. Linking is just an indicator (that is not 100%)
of a derived work.
As for when the linking is done, (static at build, dynamic at load,
dynamic during run), that makes zero difference as to whether something
is a derived work.
Hi.
It might be meaningful to ask this question broadly: How can be two
programs related and still not violate the "derivative work under
copyright law" thing? (law of US/EU/international/any important country)
When are they independent and when a new combined work emerges?
Two distinct files dynamically linked together violate, yet one Fedora
iso file bundling both does not violate - why?
As stated before, linking is probably irrelevant. Bits in symbol table
originating from the other file are references - references are
generally permitted. AFAIK copyright law does not care about
functionality. Just text, translation and modification.
Please, enlighten me.
Frantisek Kluknavsky
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
