Re: Plugins, libraries, licenses and Debian

[mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård)]

frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster) writes:

> mru@kth.se (Måns Rullgård) schrieb:
>
>> Arnoud Engelfriet <galactus@stack.nl> writes:
>>
>>> But anyway, although computer programs definitely are recognized
>>> as subject to copyright in the EU, they do not fit the definition
>>> of "derivative work" or "adaptation" very well. There just is no
>>> guidance in this area. If you translate something, turn a book
>>> into a play or putting a poem to music, you can just look it up
>>> in the law. But software just isn't discussed much (other than
>>> the no-reverse-engineering-unless and one-backup-copy provisions
>>> and the like).
>>
>> Exactly my point.  What would the equivalent of dynamic linking be?  A
>> book that says on the first page: take chapters 3 and 6 from book Foo
>> and insert after chapter 4 in this book, then read the result.
>
> Perhaps more realistic:
>
> "Exercises and solutions. An add-on book to: A.Uthor, Principles of
> Somethingology. An undergraduate textbook, PubLisher Inc., Someplace
> 2002"
>
> with chapter 10 containing the exercise:
>
> 5. The derivation of the CENTRAL FORMULA in chapter 3 (pp. 64ff) was a
>    little simplified. With the knowledge of the Advanced anything as
>    outlined in chapter 10, you should now be able to understand the
>    complete derivation.
>
>    a) What is the simplification in the derivation on p. 66?
>
>    b) How can it be formulated correctly?

Wouldn't such a book be allowed?  I can't see anything that would stop
it.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@kth.se