Re: documentation x executable code

["Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>]

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:49:36 +0100, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * Craig Sanders:
> 
> > and, as you pointed out yourself, this freedom (to patch) exists
> > even when it is not explicitly granted by the license.
> 
> Without permission from the author, you may not redistribute patches
> in many jurisdictions.  (DJB's analysis clearly does not apply to the
> situation in Germany, just to name one example.)

Could you elaborate on this?  Is this because there are snippets of
the code being modified in the patch?  Or is there some more basic
theory in operation by which patches are equated with the derivative
works resulting from their application, or are incitements to
infringement by their recipients?  Do you have a reference to which
you could point readers, preferably directly from a statute or legal
proceeding?  (I read German very, very slowly, but I'll give it a
shot.)

Cheers,
- Michael