Re: License of coq documentation
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:38:25AM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> On 12/20/05, Lionel Elie Mamane <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> The tarball compiler (I mean the person that put all the files
>> together in a consistent collection) can assert a "compilation
>> copyright" (that is a copyright over the whole tarball because of his
>> work in putting it together). The license over this compilation can be
>> the GPL, and then you have to obey the GPL on everything you take out
>> of the tarball.
> Nonsense. Copyright on a compilation doesn't extend to
> constituents. It's the creative selection and arrangement of
> constituent works what it covers.
So the world is actually a better place than I thought.