> Just because you believe it to be the case that users of libraries are not derivatives of those libraries does not make it true.
Just because you believe a set of machine instructions to be a library does not make it true.
The real problem is, we are now trying to legally define something that's really only a convenient mental abstraction for dividing up "things a processor does" into bins. Where does one package begin and another one end? Your processor doesn't know. It's a fiction.
Often, a very useful fiction. But then we get edge cases and the analogy breaks down.
Thesis complied in the most technical sense (no CSS, JS, or images) so I'm not sure how this accomplished anything in the name of "software freedom."
Just because you believe a set of machine instructions to be a library does not make it true.
The real problem is, we are now trying to legally define something that's really only a convenient mental abstraction for dividing up "things a processor does" into bins. Where does one package begin and another one end? Your processor doesn't know. It's a fiction.
Often, a very useful fiction. But then we get edge cases and the analogy breaks down.
Thesis complied in the most technical sense (no CSS, JS, or images) so I'm not sure how this accomplished anything in the name of "software freedom."