[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: license questions.

Auke Jilderda <auke@jilderda.net> writes:

> - First, the boundaries of the GPL are unclear.  Exactly what does the
>   term "derived work" mean, does the license propagate across static
>   linking, dynamic linking, IPC, or even socket communication?  This
>   unclarity is a risk for companies and, consequently, they take a
>   cautious approach, staying on the safe side by not linking their
>   proprietary software (that contains their business value) to GPL
>   software.  In other words, the unclarity in the GPL license causes
>   that software to be used a bit less than had it been clear about its
>   boundaries.

"Derived work" is a well-established term in copyright law.  The
reason the GPL doesn't give a local definition is because it reaches
exactly as far as the normal meaning of a derived work.  The
boundaries of what is a derived work are *exactly* the same,
therefore, as for any other copyright program.

Reply to: