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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,43ae7f61992b3213
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,faf964ea4531e6af
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: les@MCS.COM (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: [O/T 4 cla] Re: GPL and "free" software
Date: 1999/05/10
Message-ID: <7h5rf0$i3t$1@Mercury.mcs.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 476068487
References: <7fibd5$jc7$1@news2.tor.accglobal.net>
 <7grvur$li2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7h2aca$2mqq$1@Mercury.mcs.net>
 <7h2i00$adl$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1999-05-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <7h2i00$adl$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Robert Dewar  <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> wrote:

>> Like they say, if the two lawyers can't agree, how are the jurors
>> supposed to...
>
>I really strongly suggest that you look up the case law here
>to better understand the abstract-filter-compare-iterate
>methodology, which is fundamental for judging software copyright
>issues.

Can you suggest a starting point where (a) the parties had not
agreed to restrictive licensing terms and (b) the material copied
contained only changes to the covered work and none of the 
original?  Any other type of case would not have much relevance.

  Les Mikesell
    les@mcs.com