Re: Re: Derivative Works and Perl Modules

Consider this, from the GPL Faq:

In an object-oriented language such as Java, if I use a class that is GPL'ed without modifying, and subclass it, in what way does the GPL affect the larger program?
...
Subclassing is creating a derivative work. Therefore, the terms of the GPL affect the whole program where you create a subclass of a GPL'ed class.

It's these types of issues that really add to the confusion. Also see tilly's reply in Using GPL'd Perl Modules in Commercial Software. There is a lot of room here, and I think many companies will making "use" of it shortly.

Comment on Re: Re: Derivative Works and Perl Modules

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Derivative Works and Perl Modules by Elian (Parson) on Jan 03, 2003 at 20:45 UTC
I'm pretty sure the FSF is stretching a bit there. If you base the source of the child class on the publically documented parent class interface, rather than on the source of the parent class, you're OK. (The resulting binary, if you generate one, is of course still a derived work) Claiming otherwise is a bit dodgy. If it works the way they say, making a child class of a GPL class makes your code GPL. If that was true then if someone released a version of, say, the C runtime library that was GPL (rather than LGPL) it would make your entire system and all the code that made it up GPL'd. The derived work, generally, is the executable not the source. The source is only a derivative work when it's a modification of someone else's source, which is almost undoubtedly not the case. The wording here is a bit ambiguous.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Derivative Works and Perl Modules
by Elian (Parson) on Jan 03, 2003 at 20:45 UTC

Claiming otherwise is a bit dodgy. If it works the way they say, making a child class of a GPL class makes your code GPL. If that was true then if someone released a version of, say, the C runtime library that was GPL (rather than LGPL) it would make your entire system and all the code that made it up GPL'd.

The derived work, generally, is the executable not the source. The source is only a derivative work when it's a modification of someone else's source, which is almost undoubtedly not the case. The wording here is a bit ambiguous.

[reply]