On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:23:09AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > >> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Copyright law is not concerned about that, and the question if > > something is a derived work from something else has nothing to do > > with the specific details of an abstract idea like an interface, only > > with the fine details on its implementation, like if code was copied > > or not. > > That's clear. I think the question goes along the lines of: if > program A is under a non-GPL compatible license, and provides a plug-in > interface, that is, it can be extended but the plugins are /not/ > required for program's A operation, and plugin B is under the GPL, can > someone distribute program A and plugin B together?
Please point me to the specific case being discussed. If there is no specific case, then what's the point of the discussion? If it is the point to decide to what extend the GPL applies, then there is no point, because this is not something we will be able to decide here and now. I would give the GPL a fair amount to be reaching quite far, and I would also think that in any of the border cases, the court will look closely at the circumstances, like what is the obvious intent of the bundling. The critical question here is when does something constitute a derived work. Who knows, for a court it might be enough that you used the GPL'ed stuff for your development, and link to it on some web page. I don't know, as IANAL. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
