Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking?
Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking?
Posted Nov 18, 2024 12:34 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341)In reply to: Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking? by Wol
Parent article: Two approaches to tightening restrictions on loadable modules
If I write a work of fiction, which builds on a universe you created in a work of fiction you wrote, such that to properly understand my work of fiction the reader really needs to have read your work of fiction so as to understand the characters, may I distribute my work of fiction without any regard for your copyright in your work of fiction? (I never distribute your work, and the "combination" of my work with yours only ever happens "dynamically" at "readtime" in the readers head).
If I write a programme, that builds on a body of code you created, such that to understand the function of my programme, the programmer needs to understand the basic, visible function of the code underlying whatever APIs it exposes; and such that the computer in order to be able to interpret my code and make my code function needs to also have your code present, may I distribute my work without any refgard for your copyright in your work? (I never distributed your work, and the combination of my work with yours only ever happens dynamically at runtime - ignoring entirely the matter of compilation and whether copyright vests in API definitions).
?
Posted Nov 18, 2024 12:39 UTC (Mon)
by pizza (subscriber, #46)
[Link]
Unfortunately, in the US, "API definitions" are copyrightable. Use of them _may_ be considered fair use though.
(Thanks, Oracle...)
Posted Nov 18, 2024 16:43 UTC (Mon)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (1 responses)
That's often called FanFic, and/or "Classic Literature".
As a fan of pTerry, he often did that a lot. To truly understand Maskerade, you need to know Phantom of the Opera. To truly understand Wytches Abroad, you need to know Hamlet. As far as other authors / composers go, West Side Story may be a nice musical, but would you get the deeper meaning without knowing Romeo and Juliet? I love Miss Saigon, but much more is understood when you know Madame Butterfly. Etc etc.
The problem is, the answer is always "it depends". And it always helps to show that the work you depend on, itself depends on even deeper works. Both Hogwarts and Unseen University have a heavy dependence on works like the "Billy Bunter" books, and Greyfriars, and stuff like that. And as Ecclesiastes says, "there is nothing new under the sun", it shouldn't be that hard quite often to come up with evidence that copyright in stories isn't as obvious as people like to pretend ...
So why should programming be any different?
Cheers,
Posted Dec 6, 2024 1:33 UTC (Fri)
by jjs (guest, #10315)
[Link]
I'm also aware that Phantom of the Opera, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Madam Butterfly are out of copyright. You can find legal copies of them on Project Gutenberg. So Pratchet's fine works are NOT violations of copyright for, among other reasons, the fact there's no copyright to violate. It also means the examples don't really throw any light on whether or not his writings would have been copyright violations IF those works were still under copyright. Courts (at least in the US) tend to go with the simplest conclusion to reach, and (traditionally) purposefully did NOT speculate on other reasoning that were irrelevant (i.e. in this case, whether or not it would have been a violation IF the preceding work were copyrighted), in order to avoid setting precedent.
> That's often called FanFic, and/or "Classic Literature".
And fanfic can certainly be violation of copyright. Try writing a Star Wars novel and publishing it without getting Disney (previously LucasFilms) license. Desilu was very tolerant of fanfic for Star Trek (not certain about current owners).
The dividing line between "copyright violation" and "no copyright violation" in derived works (and what constitutes a derived work), from my understanding, is something that's decided on a case by case basis by the courts in the US.
Note: IANAL
Posted Nov 19, 2024 0:43 UTC (Tue)
by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325)
[Link]
This has been a serious point of controversy for at least as long as the internet has existed. You can find threads on early Usenet filled with professional and amateur authors debating this very topic. Much like the case of dynamic linking, there has as of yet been no case law. Unlike the dynamic linking case:
* There have been a few close calls, with the closest probably being The Wind Done Gone by Alice Randall. In the case regarding that book, the Eleventh Circuit found that the publisher of Gone With the Wind was not entitled to a preliminary injunction because a fair use defense likely applied, and the parties then settled out of court.
Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking?
Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking?
Wol
What is copyright in derived works?
Is the GPL actually viral across dynamic linking?
* A non-profit, The Organization for Transformative Works, exists, hosts a significant amount of fan fiction on the internet, retains lawyers, and is prepared to defend themselves in court if anyone ever sues them.
* In practice, nobody wants to sue the OTW because litigation is expensive, it might establish a precedent in favor of fan fiction, and it would generate a lot of negative press in the short term. Also, really egregious cases (where fair use is unlikely to work, such as when large amounts of text are copied verbatim) can be handled much more efficiently through the usual DMCA process instead of a lawsuit.