Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > RMS is very actively pushing his intentions of the GPL. The GPL has > a preambel, he is giving talks about this subject, answers questions > privately and in public. It is hard to miss his opinions. > > He is also explaining what he thinks of derivative works, especially > in conjunction with header files, libraries etc. > > My question is: Does this make any difference? You don't say exactly, > but in your pro-GPL argument you speak about the social movement > behind the GPL. This seems to be similar, although not identically. > Could I, as a copyright holder, refer to RMS in this regard? Could the > FSF (as copyright holder) refer to its public relations on this topic?
I think you mean to ask "Does this make any difference in a legal sense"? If so, I think the answer is that it could, in some "minor" ways. For an analogy, consider the relationship between the source for a compiled program and the executable. There's nothing specific in copyright law which says that such binaries are derivative works (derived from the source code). However, for a variety of reasons -- many of which have to do with society's acceptance of the relationship -- everyone [including courts] seems to accept that binaries are covered by the copyright on the source. -- Raul
