Re: LGPL module linked with a GPL lib

[Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>]

Andrew Suffield writes:

> On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 02:42:35PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote:
>> Static linking can *not* create a derived work, because it is an
>> automatic process. Poster case: is hello, generated from hello.c:
>> 
>>   #include <stdio.h>
>>   int main(int argc, char** argv) {
>>     printf("Hello\n");
>>     return 0;
>>   }
>> 
>> a derivative work of something it's (statically) linked to?
>> The answer is no, because derivative works, as intelligent
>> transformations, can only appear when you *create* a work.
>
> This is a FAQ, or more precisely something that people frequently get
> wrong. The derivative work was created when you wrote the source code
> that needs to be statically linked. Myopically staring at the build
> process does nothing to change this.

What statute or case law supports this position?  Comparison to
Grokster et al doesn't hold, for reasons that should have been
obvious: The GPL explicitly allows a user to use and modify code in
any way the user sees appropriate; section 2 only kicks in when you
"copy and distribute such modifications."  The standard way that one
uses GPLed program is by linking its compiled form with other works at
runtime.  It is simply bizarre to suggest that a software author is
liable for contributory copyright infringement by providing a means
for a user to do something that the user is explicitly permitted to
do.

Michael Poole