Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
Such claims are barred by the doctrine of copyright misuse and the doctrine of first sale.
So what you are saying is that GPL/LGPL is unenforceable? So that all software that uses GPL has in fact no-license at all and that regular copyright law rules?
He is saying that when you do g++ nongpl.o gpl.o you are creating a compilation, not a derivative work. His other claim is that when you do #include "gpl.hpp" #include "nongpl.hpp" int main() { gpl( 5 ); nongpl( 6 ); } you are creating a compilation of gpl.hpp, nongpl.hpp and your own copyrighted work, not a derivative work of gpl.hpp and nongpl.hpp. Obviously if you _modify_ gpl.hpp or gpl.o, you are creating a derivative work and the GPL applies in its full glory. That's how I understand Alexander's posts.