On Monday 05 November 2007 05:51:20 Shriramana Sharma wrote: > Please point out to me where in the forest of the GPL 3 liveth that > animal called the "requirement of derivative works to be distributed > under the same license"? Is there some specific thing you think the GPLv3 allows that most people don't? Or is the some specific thnig you think the GPLv3 doesn't allow, that most people do? Anyway, I don't know what you are quoting, but for conveying modified source, see section 5.c, which starts: "You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy." > GPL v3 does not at all have the word "derivative". Apparently this is an > attempt at making the GPL less dependent on the US legal system, which > is a good thing ok but I can hardly read this text. Some survey should > be conducted to determine as to what exact percentage of people taking > advantage of the GPL actually understand it, at whatever version. > > The word "based on" seems to refers to modified forms of the same work > and not derivative works. You don't have to say magic words like "derivative" to talk about derivative works in a license. Most licenses don't, in fact, they usually just talk about "modification", "changes", etc. In the context of section 5, "a work based on the Program, or the modifications to produce it from the Program, in the form of source code", yes, this not all derivative works, it's only a specific kind of derivative work. The kind that is "source code", i.e. "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it". For all non-source kinds of derivative works, see section 6. These sections use terms like "source code" and "object code" which are defined quite clearly in section 1. -- Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> <xmpp:wjl@icecavern.net> OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094 0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.