On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 13:20 -0400, Sean wrote:
How could by application be derived by this definition? The library routine is only there to do a function or to supply data that my program needs.
My program is not formed from this GPL library in question.
Well it's really up to the lawyers to decide, so i can only speculate. It seems that in the case quoted by Les, the package was found to be a derivative work, legally.
It wasn't a case and there wasn't a finding. It was a threat, based on the FSF lawyer's interpretation that the person trying to distribute a free program couldn't afford to challenge or ignore. A workaround was managed with a great deal of extra trouble. Had it been a patent issue, a workaround would not have been possible, though.
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:47:47 -0500 Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
It wasn't a case and there wasn't a finding. It was a threat, based on the FSF lawyer's interpretation that the person trying to distribute a free program couldn't afford to challenge or ignore. A workaround was managed with a great deal of extra trouble. Had it been a patent issue, a workaround would not have been possible, though.
It's good to hear it all worked out in the end.
Sean
-
Les Mikesell -
Sean