Re: license questions.
Auke Jilderda <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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
"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.