Re: Aggregation in embedded context, is kernel GPL2 prejudiceagainst embedded systems?

[Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 01:49:03PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> > even for dynamically linking including non-GPL code is not white but 
> > already dark grey.
> 
> IANAL, but personally, I think it's perfectly black and white.
> 
> No mechanical combination (that means compressing, linking, tarring,
> compiling, or whatever) can create a work for copyright purposes. It
> can only convert the original work into a new form or aggregate
> works.
> 
> There are a few exceptions to this by statute. For example,
> translation (by explicit law) can create a derivative
> work. Presumably this was because nobody ever imagined an automated
> process that could translate a work. It was assumed such a process
> must always be creative.
> 
> To create a 'derivative work', you must create a new *work*, and a
> compiler and linker can't do that. Under copyright law, the creation
> of a work requires creative input. Compilers and linkers are not
> creative.

This may (or may not) be true in the US.  But whether or not it is
true in another legal jurisdiction, or whether there is code in the
form of inline functions in header files getting dragged in at
compilation time (and thus forming part of the driver object file),
are all reasons why the only valid answer is TALK TO A LAWYER, NOT
LKML.

						- Ted