From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,25457a5aee9eaa04
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.68.219.170 with SMTP id pp10mr12904pbc.1.1338310629754;
        Tue, 29 May 2012 09:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 pr3ni62911pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:57:03 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Fuzzy machine learning framework v1.2
References: 
 <1962744539359908272.324914rm-host.bauhaus-maps.arcor.de@news.arcor.de>
 <c0e6f1d9fbc3ef0c750a01bb8e2133b4@dizum.com>
 <87k3zwp0xw.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <op.we1sofwrule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <4fc498ff$0$6548$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <op.we2u90y8ule2fv@douda-yannick>
In-Reply-To: <op.we2u90y8ule2fv@douda-yannick>
Message-ID: <4fc4ffe4$0$6559$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 May 2012 18:57:08 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 8d3a5637.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=HZ7f3O^AWZ?TQL:hoD@>T?4IUK<Cl32<14Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;GPjY=6>gZA9nc\616M64>:Lh>_cHTX3j=QAO51`^>FO5
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-05-29T18:57:08+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 29.05.12 18:11, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote:
> Le Tue, 29 May 2012 11:38:02 +0200, Georg Bauhaus
> <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> a écrit:
>> It is stunning to see programmers who are used to formal,
>> rational thinking, becoming irrational. ;-) ;-)
>>
>> The *combination* of someone else's work and yours is not your own
>> work!
> On the opposite, that's rational and practical. There is an issue with proper
> measure of things here. Think about the extreme case of a single line of GPL
> in a million lines… you see?

The GPL clarifies, to some extent, what constitutes a derivative work.

If your software depends on library L, then regardless of its
size L's license is going to apply. I don't know any license
that defines what size removes the "depends" clause.

(That's like "a little pregnant"; oddly, whenever the GPL
is mentioned together with "viral", then "ratio" vanishes.)

[Summary of how the GPL restricts freeloading snipped.]

Here are two licensing test questions:

Suppose you have written a program P of 30 K own SLOC.
Program P depends on a library L that has 2 K SLOC.
You view the ratio of 2/30 as meaning that L is "tiny stuff".

Will you then be complaining about licensors if you can
get a closed source license for L from them, but at a
price that you find not to be in proportion with 2/30?

Will your complaint have a legal basis?