LinuxInsider Talkback
|
![]() ![]() |
See Full Story
When it comes to creative works, such as a drawing or a piece of writing or music, the law is pretty clear about what is a derivative work and what isn't. Not so much with software. If the software is open source -- that is, licensed under the GNU General Public License or a similar license -- the waters get even murkier. Basically, a derivative work is made when you take someone else's copyrighted work -- such as an image or set of notes -- and make it a part of another work.
To the best of my understanding, "For example, the GNU GPL Latest News about GPL mandates that those who use software covered by its license make available the source code." is not a correct statement.
The GPL does not demand anything of that sort for _using_ the software, not even when someone does modify the source code (loosely = creating a derivative work). However it does demand the publication of the source for _distributing_ the software. Further clarification can be found at the GPL FAQ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic
The GPL does not demand anything of that sort for _using_ the software, not even when someone does modify the source code (loosely = creating a derivative work). However it does demand the publication of the source for _distributing_ the software. Further clarification can be found at the GPL FAQ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic