🚀 go-pugleaf

os360051@wvnvms.wvnet.edu (T. Kurt Bond) writes:
> In article <F6m0eB8w164w@mantis.co.uk>, 
> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Lieutenant 030) writes:
> > I obtain a copy of GNU Emacs, and set about porting it to some new
> > architecture Foo.  I identify all the functions which don't work for some
> > reason on the new architecture, and document what they are supposed to
> > do.
> > 
> > I then give the documents to a programmer, who writes a set of proprietary
> > functions performing the appropriate tasks on our new architecture.
[...]
> > I distribute this modified non-functional "Emacs library" under the terms o
> > the GPL.  I sell my proprietary functions as "Emacs for Foo", supplying
> > a small install program which links them with the "Emacs library" to create
> > an executable.  I can even provide the "Emacs library" on the same disk.
[...]
> You can't do that.  The resulting program is clearly a derivative of GNU
> Emacs,

Why is it clearly a derivative of GNU Emacs?

What if my product were a database system which called the same Emacs routines
to provide text editing functionality?

Are you saying it must be derivative because it performs the same functions?


mathew

-- 
Hail Eris! / "Our whole economy's based on fear and death; how long can we get
away with this?" --- Jello Biafra / Message for Kodak: Bring back Dan Bredy! /
PGP RSA public key available on request / Desperately seeking Negativland's U2
CD / Just another would-be Mac owner put off by Apple's monopolistic practices