Installshield 6 (inter-proc) patches

[Patrik Stridvall]

> David Elliott <dfe at tgwbd.org> writes:
> 
> > The crypto part of ADVAPI32 was the example I used.  Let's 
> say I were
> > to write a CryptoAPI implementation as a set of seperate 
> source files.
> > With the LGPL I could compile all of that stuff and refer to it as a
> > library.  What is a library? I would say one or more object files
> > linked together form a library.  I could then take my CryptoAPI
> > library, link it with the rest of Wine's ADVAPI32 and distribute a
> > libadvapi32.so that could be dropped into a wine install.
> 
> If it is a completely separate library that doesn't contain portions
> that are derivative work of ADVAPI32, then yes you can do that. But
> you cannot for instance decide to reimplement CreateWindow and not
> release it simply by putting it into a separate file, which was what
> Patrik suggested; because your new CreateWindow will necessarily use
> internal functions and variables of USER32, and thus would be
> considered a derivative work.

It takes more that use to be considered a derived work,
but the doctrine of derived work is central to the discussion.

One thing that is very important to note is copyright only protects
expression not fact or ideas. In this case we are talking about use
which I guess is better to talk about in terms of functionality.

Functionality on the other lies closer to fact or ideas than to expression
so I would consider it doubtful for the courts to extend the doctrine
of derived work to protect this.