Subject: RE: Initial Developer's Public License
From: Alexander Terekhov <TEREKHOV@de.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:15:47 +0100

"Ann W. Harrison" wrote:
[...]
> In this example, the commercial tool would probably be a
> single executable and not a set of libraries or plug-ins.
> To my understanding, that's similar to a User's Guide to
> Version 9 based on, extending and correcting the Guide
> for Version 8.

To my uneducated understanding, that's similar to

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0387954015

To me, this book is a "mere aggregation" of papers/works 
with some "glue" (start up code, etc ;-) ). Aggregation 
doesn't make this whole book [just like the executable] 
a derivative work of its "components". I tend to think
that executables are like Java JARs (JARs are simple 
archives of java classes files and any other "data"
stuff). I just can't see how a copyright in one Java 
class can affect other classes (even if something is 
inherited/composed/linked with the other(s)).

regards,
alexander.

P.S. You might want to take a look at the CPL FAQ (Q15 
and Q19). Eclipe.org legal FAQ is also worth reading.

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3