Re: GPL: Static/Dynamic vs Derivative work and the Conservative position (Re: GPL, yet again.)

[Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>]

Don Armstrong wrote:
[...]
> The argument of the FSF has been (and continues to be, TTBOMK) that
> dynamic linking with a GPLed work forms a derivative work when the
> binary is distributed. 

I have yet to see any arguments from the FSF apart from baseless 
and totally lunatic claims regarding derivative works and linking.

http://web.novalis.org/talks/compliance-for-developers/slide-49.html

[begin textual copying]

July 27, 2004 GPL Compliance for Software Developers Legal notes
----------------------------------------------------------------

Legal notes

Static linking creates a derivative work through textual copying

Most dynamic linking cases involve distributing the library

Still a derivative work:

Dynamic linking

Distributing only the executable (testtriangle)

Still a derivative work:

Distributing the source code of software which links to a library

when that library is the only software to provide that interface

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2004, Free Software Foundation. Verbatim copying
permitted provided this notice is preserved.

[end textual copying]

I suppose that "through textual copying", this message *and
all archives* (google's, etc.) that now contain it, constitute
unauthorized (note that only verbatim copying was permitted)
"derivative work" (under the GNU Constitution -- aka the GPL) 
of the FSF's "legal notes". 

And given that it's all linked on the net... I've thoroughly 
contaminated the entire Internet. Oh my bad.

regards,
alexander.