Re: what is the current status of GPL v3

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> It sure is part of any GNU system, in the form of an aggregation (in
> the case of GCC).  The C library, however, is linked with the
> executables, and that exceeds mere aggregation.  The C library,
> however, is licensed under the LGPL.

Function calls have no impact on copyright status of combined work. 

It's still a compilation ("mere aggregation" in GNU speak), not a
derivative work ("modified work as a whole" in GPL 2b speak).

http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise27.html

"Some have claimed that an application program that needs a library 
for its operation is a derivative work of that library. They take 
that position because the application program is “based on” the 
library because it was written to use the subroutines and other 
aspects of the library.

Such a position is misplaced. ...

It could be argued that the component program really does include 
portions of the library that it uses – data structures that are 
passed as parameters, or even the parameter lists themselves. But 
elements dictated by external considerations are filtered out when 
trying to determine whether there is copyright infringement.

No other conclusion makes sense. If it were not the case, then any 
program using the applications program interfaces (APIs) of an 
operating system could be considered a derivative work of that 
operating system. And, under the exclusive right to prepare 
derivative works, the copyright owner of an operating system such 
as Microsoft Windows could control who was allowed to write 
programs for that operating system."

regards,
alexander.