On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Encolpe Degoute <encolpe.dego...@free.fr> wrote: > * links to our GPL'd Python code (eg, by using Python's "import" > statement)
I agree with the intent of this and the long-standing community choice of license, but sometimes wonder if the logical implications of the claim "use this namespace and also this API, and that means you have created a derivative work" are negative vis-a-vis Oracle v. Google? Dynamic linking is a problem for copyleft definitions of derivative works. We as free software folks want APIs to not be copyrightable, except when it is useful? It seems a bit problematic to say API use constitutes a derivative work (or even API plus namespace use) because if this ever did go to court, it might set or reinforce case law possibly detrimental overall to free/open software and culture? Just food for thought. Not intending to troll or stir up controversy here. Sean _______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list product-develop...@lists.plone.org https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-product-developers
