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

Re: LGPL module linked with a GPL lib

On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 02:42:35PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimar?es wrote:
> Static linking can *not* create a derived work, because it is an
> automatic process. Poster case: is hello, generated from hello.c:
>   #include <stdio.h>
>   int main(int argc, char** argv) {
>     printf("Hello\n");
>     return 0;
>   }
> a derivative work of something it's (statically) linked to?
> The answer is no, because derivative works, as intelligent
> transformations, can only appear when you *create* a work.

This is a FAQ, or more precisely something that people frequently get
wrong. The derivative work was created when you wrote the source code
that needs to be statically linked. Myopically staring at the build
process does nothing to change this.

Additionally, when linking statically, you are performing literal
copying of the original work into the target binary, so the GPL kicks
in there too.

> Anyway, the person who "recombines" the "film" and "track", in the
> case of dynamic linking, is the *USER*, in the process of using the
> program, and copyrights protection do not apply at that moment, as
> per 17USC.

You Are Wrong. Under US law, this is Contributory Infringement, which
carries a full array of jail terms. SCOTUS just upheld it against
Grokster a few weeks ago. Providing an automated system for users to
perform infringing acts, with the sole intent of aiding them in
performing those acts, is the same as doing them yourself.

The rest of the world isn't quite so crazy, but then it doesn't get
into this ridiculous word game in the first place.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: