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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,c92999d3d36edb6c X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,CP1252 Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe22.iad.POSTED!4a71828c!not-for-mail From: Hyman Rosen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: MinGW Ada compiler licence question targeting commercial applications References: <4a3a1fd6$0$30224$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <9331a174-96f7-4551-bc74-3d6946eb9d01@k20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9331a174-96f7-4551-bc74-3d6946eb9d01@k20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@WWWSpace.NET NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:28:53 UTC Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:28:52 -0400 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6506 Date: 2009-06-18T11:28:52-04:00 List-Id: Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne) wrote: > Now, what does � based upon one or more preexisting works � stands > for ? If I use a compiler to compile an application, the work is in > someway based on the compiler. So is it a derived work? A derivative (not derived) work under copyright law is created by a significant auctorial transformation of an existing work. For example, the recent novel "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies" is a derivative work of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice". A collective work is a work arranged by an author which contains copyrightable elements; to create and distribute such a work requires permission from the rights holders of those elements. The process by which either a derivative work or a collective work is produced is not generally relevant to the permissions required to copy and distribute that work. In the general case, the copyright of the compiler does not affect the copyright of the compiled program. However, if the output produced by the compiler contains significant copies of copyrighted works, then that output is a collective work and permission to copy and distribute it must be acquired from the rights holders of the copied elements. I don't know enough about the Ada compiler in question to know whether this is the case.