Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!yba
From: yba@athena.mit.edu (Mark H Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: GNU C++ for toolkits
Message-ID: <2541@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 25 Jan 88 23:47:11 GMT
References: <gVxV9Ty00VsAy8415a@andrew.cmu.edu> <802@rlgvax.UUCP> <2479@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <807@rlgvax.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: yba@athena.mit.edu (Mark H Levine)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 9


I do not believe that either a reasonable layman nor a legal expert
would assert that a program compiled under, say GNU C++, is in any
way a derivative work based upon the translator.  This seems to be
the basis of your difference with Sommerfeld, and can probably be
safely dismissed.  (If you did a commercial compiler by starting
from the base of GNU's body of source code, you are in the other camp).

Can this now be moved to private e-mail or directly to RMS?