Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 2/10/2010 5:48 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > LMAO! Don't you think that the GPL is not the state and as such it just > > can't grant any copyright irrespective of jointness under 17 USC 101 > > In the case of a GPLed work . . .
One *SINGLE* (consisting of a separate unique whole) project is not a joint work although it produces a (single) (combined) "larger program"??? "If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. " "But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program. " http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html (The static linking "whole" aside for a moment, that is.) Please elaborate, Hyman. TIA!!! regards, alexander. P.S. "It is just like a suit to enforce a copyright license, which arises under state law rather than under the Copyright Act. " Hyman's lovin' http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gaiman_v._McFarlane P.P.S. "the registered work is a compilation" Hyman's lovin' http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gaiman_v._McFarlane -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss