Re: [Boost-users] derivative work

From: Ruediger Berlich (ruediger.berlich_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-11 18:46:46

Hi there,

> Ask a lawyer.  

I might (have to). But clarification of the intentions by the maintainers
and authors of Boost or the Boost Software License could give a much
clearer picture.

I see this definition as a very central point.

> It is my understanding that derivative means a work based 
> on something.  Since your code uses shared_ptr it would then be "based
> on" shared_ptr.

But that is exactly where clarification is needed. My understanding of the
phrase "derivative works" differs from yours, and I suspect that this will
be the case for many people.

I understand that it is an explicit goal of Boost developers to allow an
almost entirely free (in the sense of free speech and free beer) usage of
the library, INCLUDING commercial use.

If, by simply using (or worse: deriving classes from) components of Boost
the authors (who are possibly part of a company) would give away rights in
their or their companies' code, very few commercial entities would ever
produce software intended for public consumption, based on Boost. 

It is my understanding that this is one of the most central points where the
GPL and the Boost Software License differ. The GPL automatically extends to
code based on GPL'ed code. It is "viral" (I do not like that phrase), no
matter whether the original, GPL'ed code itself was modified or not. The
Boost Software License - at least this is how I understand it - is _not_
viral.

But by not defining clearly, what "derivative works" means, this question is
left open. Hence my proposal (posted to the Boost.documentation list - it
has not appeared there yet) to add a corresponding section to the FAQ.

But of course I am not a lawyer either. As per Scott's proposal, I will get
myself a copy of Lawrence Rosen's book.

> I also think you only need to list the copyright in the code if you give
> it out.

Well, many people and companies will want to be able to
a) write commercial code (and possess all rights in the code) and
b) hand out the source code without loosing any rights in their code (at
least in code that makes no modifications to the original code).

Please note that I'm not trying to argue against Boost or the Boost Software
License. This is a great library! But if I loose substantial rights by
using it, I at least want to know. Hence I believe that clarification of
the term "derivative work" is needed.

Best Regards,
Ruediger