> 1) locate_inner_otter might itself be derived from
> find_outer_otter. If so, then locate_inner_otter must itself be
> GPL.
Right, if locate_inner_otter is derived from outer_otter, it must be
distributed under the GPL.
>
> 2) If locate_inner_otter is not derived from find_outer_otter, but
> you distribute binaries for frob-otters, then you must still give
> the complete source code for both locate_inner_otter and
> find_outer_otter. The reason is that the GPL lets you copy
> find_outer_otter only if you distribute the "the whole on the
> terms of this License."
Right again, because the only thing that gives you permission to copy and
distribute outer_otter is the GPL. If you distribute outer_otter combined
with inner_otter without the source code, you breach the license. If act
outside the scope of the license, you breach copyright law, since the
license gives you permission to copy only on its terms.
>
> 3) If you attempt to defeat (2) by distributing the two functions
> separately, or distributing only locate_inner_otter, and telling
> users how to combine them to produce frob-otters, and there is no
> way to make locate_inner_otter useful without doing so, then a
> court will find that you were attempting a subterfuge, and that
> what you were doing was the same thing as (2) for all practical
> purposes.
I disagree. If this were true, than no proprietary program could be run on
GNU/Linux, and this is not the case. By their nature, proprietary programs
depend on their operating systems- they are useless withouit them. That does
not mean that proprietary programs violate the O/S's copyrights.
This subterfuge argument comes from the new Digital Millenium Copyright Act-
which basically says that you can't use new technology to get around
copyright laws. But I don't see your hypo as subterfuging copyright law. As
long as inner_otter is original work, the creator of that work, and holder
of its copyright, can distribute it freely. I don't see how a court would
view this any other way. Orignal works cannot be both original and
derivative at the same time, so a court couldn't see this work as both
original but also somehow derivative.
>
> 4) The only way to get around (3) would be to make
> locate_inner_otter useful even to people who do not have
> find_inner_otter. One way to do that would be to write an
> independent non-GPL'd implementation of find_inner_otter; another
> would be to make locate_inner_otter not depend on
> find_inner_otter anymore.
Agreed.
Above is my opinion- not necessarily my firm's. I am NOT a lawyer, and this
should not be constured as legal advice. I am a law student.
********************************************************************************************************************************
This transmission and any accompanying files are to be read only by the person
for whom it is intended. This
transmission may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not
the intended recipient, do not
disseminate, distribute, or copy this transmission. Please immediately notify
the sender that you have received
this transmission in error, and delete this transmission from your system.
Also, please note that in responding to this transmission or in forwarding
electronic mail, the Internet is not
secure and the mail and/or its attachments could be intercepted by third
parties. Further, when sending
electronic mail to our firm, it is important to confirm receipt of any time
sensitive information, since the
intended recipient may not be monitoring incoming mail.
Seidel, Gonda, Lavorgna & Monaco PC
Phone: (215) 568-8383
Fax: (215) 568-5549
