GPL and Python modules.

[Brendan Scott]

Tim Churches wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 11:12, Robert Kern wrote:
> 
>>>>>If this is true, I can't think of any way for a program to run on a
>>>>>GPL'd system (such as Linux) without becoming GPL'd itself (Unless it
>>>>>doesn't do any I/O or malloc any memory <wink>). 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes. It seems to be them is some dissonance between these two positions:
>>>>
>>>>"It is OK for a closed-source application to allocate memory on a system
>>>>running the GPLed Linux kernel"
>>>>
>>>>and
>>>>
>>>>"It is not OK for a GPL-incompatible Python application to import GPLed
>>>>code into the runtime namespace it is using."
>>>>
>>>>I shudder to think what a judge and jury would make of such a
>>>>distinction. 

Interestingly, prior to the FTA, there were court judgments which found that the reproduction in RAM in the course of running a program was not a reproduction within the meaning of the Copyright Act and, therefore, arguably such a copy would not be a derivative work within the meaning of the GPL, so it was probably never an issue. However, the FTA requires Australia to implement provisions in the Copyright Act which makes ephemeral copies infringing copies.   
 

Brendan 
IAAL
But DNHTAM
And TINLA

-- 
Brendan Scott IT Law Open Source Law 
0414 339 227 http://www.opensourcelaw.biz
Liability limited by the Solicitors' Scheme, approved under the Professional Standards Act 1994 (NSW)
Open Source Law Weekly digest: oswald at opensourcelaw.biz