Boost logo

Boost :

From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-07 09:00:12

Peter Dimov wrote:
> He is saying that when you do
> g++ nongpl.o gpl.o
> you are creating a compilation, not a derivative work.
> His other claim is that when you do
> #include "gpl.hpp"
> #include "nongpl.hpp"
> int main()
> {
> gpl( 5 );
> nongpl( 6 );
> }
> you are creating a compilation of gpl.hpp, nongpl.hpp and your own
> copyrighted work, not a derivative work of gpl.hpp and nongpl.hpp.

Yep (if you link it statically or use templated stuff).
"Incorporation" of pure declarative headers/use of API is
noninfringing because according to the AFC test elements
dictated by external considerations are filtered out when
trying to determine whether there is copyright infringement.

Read also this (quite interesting and informative piece):
(The Case against Copyright Protection of Non-literal
 Elements of Computer Software)

> Obviously if you _modify_ gpl.hpp or gpl.o, you are creating a derivative
> work and the GPL applies in its full glory.


> That's how I understand Alexander's posts.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at