[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries
From: |
Barry Margolin |
Subject: |
Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:59:19 -0400 |
User-agent: |
MT-NewsWatcher/3.4 (PPC Mac OS X) |
In article <mailman.744.1090335493.1960.gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org>,
Rui Miguel Seabra <rms@1407.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 16:45 +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> >
> > > Barry Margolin wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > Statically and dynamically linked "packages" are compilations, not
> > > > > derivative works.
> > > >
> > > > OK, but the copyright owner has control over use of his work in
> > > > compilations, so the GPL still applies.
> > >
> > > Nope. I own all those copies included in the compilations. First
> > > sale.
> >
> > First sale does not give you control over the work. It gives you
> > particular usage rights for the copy.
>
> Which do not include copying. So the copyright holder still has a say on
> how his works can be copied, in part or in whole.
Right. Unless you're talking about something like a collage, making a
compilation pretty much always requires making new copies. And in the
case we're talking about, static linking with a library always involves
copying bits and pieces from the library that was distributed to you to
the executable file that you're creating. If the library's copyright
holder doesn't authorize that copying, you can't do it legally.
And if you then redistribute the linked executable, you're making
*additional* copies of the pieces of the library that were incorporated
into it.
I suppose you *might* be able to make a case for use of the first sale
doctrine if you had a linker that deleted a module from the library as
it put it into the resulting executable. This would be analogous to
making a collage, where you cut up the original and move the pieces into
the resulting work. Each component of the library could only be used
once. And to stay legitimate, you wouldn't be able to make multiple
copies of the resulting executable -- for each executable you wanted to
distribute, you would have to purchase another copy of the library, link
it with your objects, and delete your instance of the executable when
you distribute it to someone else.
--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, (continued)
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, David Kastrup, 2004/07/18
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Martin Dickopp, 2004/07/19
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Barry Margolin, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Barry Margolin, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, David Kastrup, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Rui Miguel Seabra, 2004/07/20
- Message not available
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries,
Barry Margolin <=
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2004/07/20
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Rui Miguel Seabra, 2004/07/20
- Message not available
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2004/07/20
- Message not available
- Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, David Kastrup, 2004/07/20
Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/19
Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, jim.brown, 2004/07/19
Re: Questions on proprietary program using gcc libraries, jim.brown, 2004/07/19