27 Jan
2008
27 Jan
'08
6:21 p.m.
As the GPL doesn't differentiate between
source-code level or
binary-code level, it *includes* both cases and so a separate
application not capable of functioning as a standalone application
and communicating with another licensed under the terms of GPL is a
*derived* work.
Let's assume a Linux based operating system. Any application compiled
for that system needs the Linux kernel to be present in order to run.
Without the application cannot run. But does this render the application
a derived work? Does the application necessarily need to be licensed by
the terms of the GPL because the Linux kernel is? The simple answer to
both questions is no.
Let's look at a real world case(the best one i
could think about at
the moment), suppose you manufacture shoes that you distribute via
FedEx. Who is charging for distribution? Who is charging for the
shoes? As you can see, charging for distribution of a computer program
and charging for distribution of a computer program are 2 different
things.
I would be charging for distribution. FedEx would bill me a small amount
for their service. I would charge that amount plus a little bit for
additional costs to the customer.
Yours sincerely,
Dennis Schulmeister
--
Dennis Schulmeister - Schifferstr. 1 - 76189 Karlsruhe - Germany
Tel: +49 721/5978883 - Mob: +49 152/01994400 - eMail: dennis(a)windows3.de
Now moved to the corridor: Hermes! (http://ncc-1701a.homelinux.net)
(mostly German)
http://www.windows3.de - http://www.denchris.de
http://www.audiominds.com - http://www.motagator.net/bands/65
<GunPG KeyID: B8382C97>