> This reason is not stated in the Stack Exchange post, and I believe > it’s inaccurate (although, I am not a lawyer either). I think the > reason is that you are reading the original implementation to write > your own, so you are some kind of a compiler, or translator (as for > human spoken languages). As such, what you write is mostly the other > person’s work, so you should not claim copyright about it.
Sorry, I should have been more specific, the rewritten algorithm would not be the same, but it would be a derivative work and still covered by copyright of the original work. It’s possible that the current license allows derivative works to be licensed under a compatible license that would allow you do to what you need to do? I guess to for any suggestions we would need to know what the original use license is. Nate
