Re: License issue, and a possible solution | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
Kurt Fitzner wrote: [...] > I'm still hoping that we might see some sort of reply from Georgina (or > someone else of authority) on the issue of the client library header > file licensing. Anyone willing to step up to bat on this? Anyone? FSF's "GPL incompatibility" claims are barred by the doctrine of copyright misuse and the doctrine of first sale. As for "incorporation" of headers... http://digital-law-online.com/lpdi1.0/treatise27.html <quote> It could be argued that the component program really does include portions of the library that it uses ? data structures that are passed as parameters, or even the parameter lists themselves. But elements dictated by external considerations are filtered out when trying to determine whether there is copyright infringement. No other conclusion makes sense. If it were not the case, then any program using the applications program interfaces (APIs) of an operating system could be considered a derivative work of that operating system. And, under the exclusive right to prepare derivative works, the copyright owner of an operating system such as Microsoft Windows could control who was allowed to write programs for that operating system. </quote> regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Forum mailing list Forum@xxxxxxxxxxx http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/forum
[XFree86]
[XFree86]
[XFree86 Newbie]
[IETF Annouce]
[Security]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Yosemite]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Samba]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Linux Resources]
![]() |