elb at pidgin.im
Tue Aug 24 17:34:10 EDT 2010
Enrico Weigelt spake unto us the following wisdom:
> > Yes, really. Envision an implementation of ld.so which calls
> > functions across a Unix socket by marshalling the function calls and
> > arguments as-is. (There's obviously a lot of work involved here, and
> > as stated, it's practical only if the two halves of the call share an
> > address space.) Clearly this is a direct usage of the Purple API, and
> > one cannot claim to be independent of libpurple simply because
> > libpurple is used via IPC.
> If there happens no library/code linking, but everything talks via
> some IPC channel (network, local pipe, whatever), it's not an derived
> work anybore (assuming the header files for compiling the calling
> part were completely written from scratch, just defining the same
Then why is linking into the same address space derivative? Your
claim makes no sense. Address space is not covered in copyright law,
either. What about a microkernel system?
I'm not going to debate this any farther, for several reasons. I'm
not an IP lawyer, and I doubt you are, either. This isn't the forum
for it. Etc., etc. I stand by the characterization I gave above, and
if you have a difference of opinion and act upon it, then some day a
court of law will decide which of us was right.
The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy
for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor
determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the Devel