On Mon, 14 Feb 2000, Raul Miller wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 04:40:28PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > No. GPL.3 does not speak about "programs" at all. > Here's proof to the contrary: > <quote> > 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, > under Section 2) in object code or executable form... > </quote> Okay. So GPL.3 can be applied *either* to a program *or* a work that happens to be based on a program. The "source" it speaks about is the source of whatever one applies it to. If I apply GPL.3 to get permission to distribute the object code for an entire program, I must provide source for the entire program. If I apply GPL.3 to get permission to distribute object code for a work based on the program, I only have to provide source for that work. > > Perhaps. But I don't think the author of a program has the legal power > > to prevent that. > I think you should back up this kind of claim with a reference to the > relevant copyright law or legal precedents. I don't know how to back a claim that something is *not* in the law with a reference to the law itself. Does Melville ever mention complex numbers in "Moby Dick"? If you answer no, I expect you to back that claim with a reference to the relevant chapter of "Moby Dick". > [It's fairly clear that the GPL says that this kind of practice is > forbidden, Not to me. -- Henning Makholm
