At 2007-02-24 16:46:39 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > i'm pretty sure a court would rule that dynamic linking, or static > linking, is a greater indicator of derivation than pure aggregation.
If you really meant (and I think you did) "I'm pretty sure a court would consider dynamic or static linking an indicator of derivation in ruling whether or not some specific thing is a derived work of something else", then I'm not disagreeing with you. "Indicator" makes sense to me. > will your program infringe copyright if it is linked (statically or > dynamically) to a proprietary library which doesn't provide you with > a licence to redistribute derivatives? I don't think the question ever arises, because only the GPL seeks to use copyright instead of contract law to define the limits of what it applies to. If you used a proprietary library in some way you weren't supposed to, you would (presumably) be in breach of contract, and if you distributed it, you would be infringing the owner's copyright by distributing their work without permission. -- ams
