Re: Is the BitKeeper network protocol documented?

[Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:27:40AM -0500, Dana Lacoste wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-01-22 at 10:18, Larry McVoy wrote:
> 
> > A boundary is a boundary.  It doesn't matter how much you want or need
> > what is on the other side of that boundary, you don't get to make your
> > license cross that boundary, the law doesn't work that way.
> 
> Thus the concept of "derivative work."

Derivative works don't get to cross boundaries.  A boundary is a trump
card, it's like a patent, it has strength.  Go dig into the legal
findings in this area.  My memory is that anything you can pull out and
replace with another implementation constitutes a boundary and you may
have different licenses on either side of that boundary without fear of
them fighting.  So a derivative work which can't be easily replaced 
doesn't get to have a different license than the basis.  On the other
hand, something which plugs into an interface, like a driver or a 
file system, could have a different license.  
-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm