Re: How long is it acceptable to leave *undistributable* files in the kernel package?
@ 17/06/2004 00:43 : wrote Raul Miller :
>>>However, this sentence makes clear that "works based on the Program"
>>>is meant to include both derivative works based on the Program and
>>>collective works based on the Program.
>
>
>On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:12:37PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
>
>> In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the
>> Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on
>> a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the
>> other work under the scope of this License.
>>
>>This sentence deals just as much with collective works, and makes
>>clear that "mere aggregation" is not sufficient to invoke GPL coverage
>>of the other work(s). What is your point?
>
>
>My point is that any sentence talking about "a work based on the
>Program" is by default talking about both derivative and collective
>works.
No way. The clause #0 of the GPL is crystal clear: << a "work based on
the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work under
copyright law >> DERIVATIVE. Under copyright law.
_Not_ collective/compilation/anthology.
>
>>>So what is this "deception" you're talking about?
>>
>>The deception is calling it "great lengths." When I said the GPL
>>"deals with collective works in just two paragraphs" you focused on
>>the one where they are mentioned by name and entirely ignored the
>>other (because you don't like what it says?).
>
>
>You seem to be ignoring everything the GPL says about "works based on
>the Program".
>
"Works based on the Program" are only the _derivative_ works.
--
br,M
Reply to: