Copyleft/guide Changeset - 637f769a0a32

Changeset - 637f769a0a32

Parent rev.

Child rev.

[Not reviewed]

0 1 0

Vladimir Bejdo - 4 years ago 2020-07-06 02:48:53
bejdo@uw.edu

Continued making minor edits until I.5.2.; also removed a partially duplicated/incomplete paragraph for which there already existed a full replacement, I.5.1.2.

1 file changed with 5 insertions and 11 deletions:

gpl-lgpl.tex

0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)

gpl-lgpl.tex

➞

Show inline comments

@@ ... @@
 programmer is indeed the copyright holder of those new changes.  However,
 those changes are part and parcel to the original work distributed to
 the programmer under GPL\@. Thus, the license of the original work
 affects the license of the new whole combined and/or derivative work.
+affects the license of the new, whole combined and/or derivative work.
 % {\cal I}
 \newcommand{\gplusi}{$\mathcal{G\!\!+\!\!I}$}
@@ ... / @@ -1652,7 +1652,7 @@ holder of each of the two works. @@
 In this case, GPLv2~\S2 lays out the terms by which \gplusi{} may be
 distributed and copied.  By default, under copyright law, the copyright
 holder of \worki{} would not have been permitted to distribute \gplusi{};
-copyright law forbids it without the expressed permission of the copyright
+copyright law forbids it without the express permission of the copyright
 holder of \workg{}. (Imagine, for a moment, if \workg{} were a proprietary
 product --- would its copyright holders  give you permission to create and distribute
 \gplusi{} without paying them a hefty sum?)  The license of \workg{}, the
@@ ... @@
 would get with a typical work not covered by a copyleft license.  Thus, to
 say that this condition is any way unreasonable is simply ludicrous.
 The GPL  recognizes what is outside its scope.  When a programmer's work is
 ``separate and independent'' from any GPL'd program code with which it could be
 combined, then the obligations of copyleft do not extend to the work
 separately distributed.  Thus, Far from attempting to extend copyleft beyond the
 scope of copyright, the licenses explicitly recognize.
 Thus, GPL recognizes what is outside its scope.  When a programmer's work is
 ``separate and independent'' from any GPL'd program code with which it could
 be combined, then copyleft obligations do not extend to the independent work
@@ ... @@
 alone, inherently outside the scope of copyleft on the main work.  This is a
 misunderstanding.  When two software components are joined together to make
 one work (whether a main and some library subroutines, two objects with their
 respective methods, or a program and a ``plugin'') the combination infringes
+respective methods, or a program and a ``plugin''), the combination infringes
 the copyright on the components if the combination required copyright
 permission from the component copyright holders, as such permission was
+permission from the component's copyright holders, as such permission was
 either not available or was available on terms that were not observed.
 In other words, when combining other software with GPL'd components, the only
@@ ... @@
 \medskip
 The final paragraph of GPLv2~\S2 is worth special mention.  It is possible and
+The final paragraph of GPLv2~\S2 is worth a special mention.  It is possible and
 quite common to aggregate various software programs together on one
 distribution medium.  Computer manufacturers do this when they ship a
 pre-installed hard drive, and GNU/Linux distribution vendors do this to

0 comments (0 inline, 0 general)