On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 09:33:29AM -0600, Luke -Jr wrote:
This "derivative work" you are referring to is never distributed. Source code that can generate a work (that you seem to think is a derivative) is what is being distributed. Again, the GPL's scope is limited to copying, modification, and distribution (GPL v2, section 0).
Source code is the work.
Half of your argument *may* apply under the terms of GPLv3 (I haven't read a recent draft), but it certainly does not apply under GPLv2.
Many (a majority) of actual Linux developers disagree with you.
Then they are wrong. Refering to another work, e.g. #include doesn't make the source code a derivative work. If I have created the source code as an original work and don't include any of the referenced work, but only refer to (#include) it, it is not derivative work, and I can distribute it under any terms I may desire. In order for a work to be a derivative work, the work needs to actually include the other work and not merely refer to it.
-- Hal Duston [email protected]