Re: GPL V2 and GPLv3
Michael Poole <email@example.com> writes:
> It is clearly absurd to say that a work written a year (or five
> years) ago depends on a GPLv3-licensed version of emacs; there was
> no such thing when the older work was written.
Note also that twisting one's definition of "derived" such that this
could be interpreted to be the case is of no use. It's the
copyright-law sense of "derived work" that rules here, no whether
semantic contortions can make time-bending derivations conceivable.
\ "Somebody told me how frightening it was how much topsoil we |
`\ are losing each year, but I told that story around the campfire |
_o__) and nobody got scared." -- Jack Handey |