[boost] Re: License Conversion Update: Graph library incompatw/GPL

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.

http://xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2004-April/004450.html

Read also this (quite interesting and informative piece):

http://www.innovationlaw.org/lawforum/pages/heer.doc
(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.

Yep.

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

http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2004-March/004144.html
http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2004-March/004152.html

regards,
alexander.