On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Christophe-Marie Duquesne wrote: > I want the libary to be a fully compatible runtime and compile-time > replacement for the closed-source one, so I have no choice but to use > the exact same symbol names in my header. What I do is I take the > header of the closed-source library, wipe out the comments and > elaborated macros, and then implement all the functions of the exposed > API in a .c file. As a consequence, there is very little actual > difference between my header and the one of the closed-source library. > > The question is: what copyright issues could I possibly be exposed to? > I've been asking the question to wine developpers [1], who have to > deal with the same kind of issues, but since I intent to package my > work for debian, I would be more comfortable if someone confirmed me > it is ok to do what I do, and if it is not, how I can fix it. We are not lawyers, but see the recent Google v. Oracle lawsuit. Of course that's only USA law and USA court, but you cannot get one answer for the whole world. -- WBR, wRAR
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature