Jacob JKW wrote: [...] > > DLL copyright: author #1, author #2. > So in other words, the copyright on the DLL should read: (C) 200X > Auth#1, 200Y Auth#2?
Yep. > > > app copyright: author #2 (assuming that app doesn't contain any protected > > expression from source code to an executable by author #1). > > > > bundle copyright (on a compilation work under copyright law): author #2 > > (let's put aside originality hurdle). > I probably could have stood to have been slightly more specific, > Although the app links dynamically to the DLL, the app itself is > largely just an interface to the object wrappers (also created by > author #2) in the library. > > Example: Calculator (say) app written by author #1. Author #2 scraps > author #1's interface, adds a few minor features, creates object > wrappers, coverts the app into a DLL, and builds a new interface that > links to the library at run time. > > To me it doesn't seems 100% kosher for author #1 to lose the copyright > on the bundled app as the application engine is his work. Author #1 doesn't lose the copyright on his work. A bundle is a new work. Here's an example. http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/eula.html "The Software is a collective work of Novell." regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
