I do remember reading the endless comments on licensing on GPL/LGPL/BSD on slashdot.
> Simply linking to the existing original code in a library program without modifying it does not create a derivative work. Using a plug-in or a device driver also does not create a derivative work, even if you look at the program’s source code to determine how to use the plug-in or device driver.
This is clearly debatable. Tainted linux kernels are a thing. It's one thing if you distribute a kernel with a proprietary driver (nvidia comes to mind here). It's another thing if you ship a GPL kernel, and another if the user decided to taint their own kernel with a driver with a proprietary license.
The combined program here is the Kernel and the Nvidia drivers. You can't get around it even though the NVidia drivers are "weakly" linked into the kernel.
The question is at what point is "linking" established? During compilation? During dll loading? Or when you hit a rest endpoint?
> Simply linking to the existing original code in a library program without modifying it does not create a derivative work. Using a plug-in or a device driver also does not create a derivative work, even if you look at the program’s source code to determine how to use the plug-in or device driver.
This is clearly debatable. Tainted linux kernels are a thing. It's one thing if you distribute a kernel with a proprietary driver (nvidia comes to mind here). It's another thing if you ship a GPL kernel, and another if the user decided to taint their own kernel with a driver with a proprietary license.
The combined program here is the Kernel and the Nvidia drivers. You can't get around it even though the NVidia drivers are "weakly" linked into the kernel.
The question is at what point is "linking" established? During compilation? During dll loading? Or when you hit a rest endpoint?