Merijn de Weerd wrote: [...] > What the GPL says in section 2 is that if you combine your own > work with the GPL work, the GPL applies to the whole. That's > logical: such a combination is a derivative work. This paragraph > of text is my original work. The combination of my paragraphs > with the parts of your message that I cited above is a derivative > work of your message.
Not at all. It's a compilation. Now, this work is a derivative work of your message: What the GPL says in section 2 is that if you combine your own independent work under copyright law with the GPL work, the GPL doesn't not bring the other work under the scope of the GPL. This combination of paragraphs with the parts of your message that I cited above is a compilation and not a derivative work of your message. And only this work is a derivative work of your message. Please bare in your mind that <quote> In fact, the GPL itself rejects any automatic aggregation of software copyrights under the GPL simply because one program licensed under the GPL is distributed together with another program that is not licensed under the GPL: "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License. </quote> http://www.terekhov.de/Wallace_v_FSF_37.pdf regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
