Re: denying rights?

[Alexander Terekhov]

"Alfred M. Szmidt" wrote:
> 
>    > However, this software can't be combined with any "normal" GPLed
> 
>    Not true.
> 
> Combination in this context means to share code between two programs.

In the copyright context, a computer program is a bunch of 
instructions written in some computer language to be protected as a 
literary work. Note that binary representation of that bunch of 
instructions is just another form, and for the copyright purpose it 
is equivalent to source code. No more no less. I know that FSF/RMS 
is fond of sorta reusing words ("freedom", etc.) for something with 
unconventional meaning that fits some idiotic FSF's agenda, but so 
what?

> I.e. combination == derivate work, 

What work? A combination is a compilation. And original compilation is
never a derivative work. One can create a derivative compilation by
modifying some preexisting compilation, but that's beside the point.

HOUSE REPORT NO. 94-1476: 

-----
Between them the terms ''compilations'' and ''derivative works''
which are defined in section 101 comprehend every copyrightable
work that employs preexisting material or data of any kind. There
is necessarily some overlapping between the two, but they basically
represent different concepts. A ''compilation'' results from a
process of selecting, bringing together, organizing, and arranging
previously existing material of all kinds, regardless of whether
the individual items in the material have been or ever could have
been subject to copyright. A ''derivative work,'' on the other
hand, requires a process of recasting, transforming, or adapting
''one or more preexisting works''; the ''preexisting work'' must
come within the general subject matter of copyright set forth in
section 102, regardless of whether it is or was ever copyrighted.

The second part of the sentence that makes up section 103(a) deals 
with the status of a compilation or derivative work unlawfully 
employing preexisting copyrighted material. In providing that 
protection does not extend to ''any part of the work in which such 
material has been used unlawfully,'' the bill prevents an infringer 
from benefiting, through copyright protection, from committing an 
unlawful act, but preserves protection for those parts of the work 
that do not employ the preexisting work. Thus, an unauthorized 
translation of a novel could not be copyrighted at all, but the 
owner of copyright in an anthology of poetry could sue someone who 
infringed the whole anthology, even though the infringer proves 
that publication of one of the poems was unauthorized.
----- 

regards,
alexander.