Re: How long is it acceptable to leave *undistributable* files in the kernel package?
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 04:41:42PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> This is not the way the law works. The presumption is not "this work
> is a derivative work because Raul Miller claims it is." Humberto has
> cited reasons why the kernel tarball (or binary images) should be
> considered a compilation rather than a derivative work. You have only
> claimed that they should be a derivative work, without referring to a
> "why."
I just took a closer look at your cites
http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise6.html
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html
the digital-law-online page says: "There is necessarily some overlapping
between the two". You quoted this yourself.
The copyright.gov page doesn't really say anything that would make me
think differently.
In other words, it's still not a dichotomy. I was too hasty when I
wrote my message saying that it was.
--
Raul
Reply to: