Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

[Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>]

David Schwartz writes:

>> Most of this list has
>> already dismissed your rather unique -- I would even say frivolous --
>> idea of how far "mere aggregation" goes: I, for one, have better
>> things to do than explain why a C file is not a "mere aggregation" of
>> the functions it contains.)
>>
>> Michael Poole
>
> Of course it's not mere aggregation. The functions in a C file are
> creatively combined. How many times do I have to say that the opposite of
> "mere aggregation" is creative combination?
>
> It is not unique, it is part of the definition of a "derivative work".

By "creative combination" do you mean what US copyright law refers to
as compilations (or their subset collective works)?

Compilations can be creative combinations while still being mere
aggregation under the GPL.  For example, if applications are selected
to run with a Linux kernel, and they are distributed together, the
collection is a creative selection -- and this seems to be one of the
cases evoked by the GPL's reference to "mere aggregation".  See also
practically every Linux distribution on the planet.

Compilations also can be creative combinations and *more* than mere
aggregation: for example, Linux with respect to its subsystems, or any
case where a larger work is derivative of one of its components.

However, compilations (even to the extent they are creative
combinations) are not necessarily derivative works of their elements.
For more details, see
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html#compilations

Michael Poole