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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7684e927a2475d0
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: can one build commercial applications with latest gnat and other
 licenses related questions...
References: <tLmlg.119263$dW3.82693@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>
 <449660f0$0$11077$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
 <jowtbdcubc.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
 <1150717184.087134.177850@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <e7f7t6$qie$1@online.de>
 <1151050924.969806.284410@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
 <e7h852$7h0$1@online.de> <jccum3-trl.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
 <e7j2i7$4vl$1@online.de> <i0lvm3-h59.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
 <e7jct3$o55$1@online.de>
 <449d3c15$0$4517$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
From: M E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Date: 24 Jun 2006 16:39:12 +0200
Message-ID: <wflkrmpqi7.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.218.241
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151159592 88.72.218.241 (24 Jun 2006 16:33:12
 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4985
Date: 2006-06-24T16:39:12+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:

> Michael Bode wrote:
> 
> > I would like to hear what the FSF thinks 'using a library' is as
> > opposed to 'derive work from a library'.
> 
> "derivative work" and "use" are legal terms, best explained by
> legal professionals.
> 
> The discussions of whether or not which constitutes what have been
> lengthy, and IIRC usually suffered from mixing everyday notions
> of "use", "derive", etc., with their relevant meaning in licensing
> contracts.

IANAL, IANAL, IANAL.

I'd also add, that "license" is AFAIK (IANAL) no legal notion in some
countries. I have been informed that it is something that exists in US
law but as thus and under this name not in German law (i.e.). There is
still copyright and the GPL (for instance) has binding force, because
of copyright law, but the word license is not found in the BGB. My
impression (IANAL) was that whatever corresponds to licensing during
distribution in Germany doesn't fall under contract law, but under
copyright law. But IANAL.

Regards .. Markus