Licenses etc. (was: Re: [antlr-interest] Re: Antlr Studio iscool.)

[Anthony Youngman]

I believe "derivative work" is defined by the Berne Convention.

And yes, I agree with you that the matter is very confusing. However,
that is the fault of the politicians for failing to be clear about what
is, by its very nature, a difficult subject. But basically, if you use
part of a GPL'd work in your own program, then your program is a
derivative. You *may* get away with "fair use", and you will always get
away with "but it's for my own use" (because the GPL says you can), but
if you try to distribute your work you may get into trouble.

And I'm afraid I have to agree with Matthew as to your failure to
understand the GPL. A crucial first step is to comprehend the difference
between a *contract* (which, notwithstanding the L in the acronym, is
what EVERY click-through EULA is) and a *licence*.

If you have to say "I agree", then it's not a licence. Despite what
monied interests would have you believe. That's why you can break a
EULA, but you can't break the GPL. You break the law, instead.

Cheers,
Wol

-----Original Message-----
From: antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org
[mailto:antlr-interest-bounces at antlr.org] On Behalf Of Paul Johnson
Sent: 23 September 2005 20:13
To: ANTLR Interest
Subject: Re: Licenses etc. (was: Re: [antlr-interest] Re: Antlr Studio
iscool.)

Matthew Tedder wrote:
> Paul et al,
> 
>   Indeed, "derrivative work" is defined by legal
> precident.  Trying to redefine this term would only
> serve the lengthen the GPL creating more potential for
> different interpretations.

Chapter and verse? Or even a single reference? What about the issue of 
'linking' in general, and dynamic linking? What if the source code is 
changed? Defined by legal precedent in what country?

I'm aware of only one test of the GPL and the definition of a 
'derivative' work, and that was Progress Software vs. MySQL, in a US 
court. In that case, on the matter of derivative works, the judge stated

that "the matter is one of fair dispute". Hardly conclusive. If you have

any more precedents, especially non-US ones, then I would be very 
pleased to hear about them.

>   So stop bashing the GPL... Especially when you
> demonstrate a blatant lack of understanding of it. 

What?


* ************************************************************************ *

This transmission is intended for the named recipient only. It may contain private and confidential information. If this has come to you in error you must not act on anything disclosed in it, nor must you copy it, modify it, disseminate it in any way, or show it to anyone. Please e-mail the sender to inform us of the transmission error or telephone ECA International immediately and delete the e-mail from your information system.

Telephone numbers for ECA International offices are: Sydney +61 (0)2 8272 5300, Hong Kong + 852 2121 2388, London +44 (0)20 7351 5000 and New York +1 212 582 2333.

* ************************************************************************ *