Uchizi M. Shaba

This piece challenges an interpretation of the GNU General Public License v3 (GPL-3.0). First, I contend that the Free Software Foundation (FSF) has implied that a dynamic link necessarily creates a “derivative work”. Thereafter, I argue that the nature of the relationship between software components should be considered when assessing whether one should adhere to the GPL-3.0 (and whether a work is a “derivative work”), as there exist degrees to which a work may be based on another work. If a work that dynamically links with a GPL-3.0-licensed software library has a profoundly strong relationship with it, then there may be a stronger imperative to adhere to the GPL-3.0, whereas if the relationship is weak (particularly if there exist multiple, functioning substitute libraries that the end user could select from or if the presence of the library remains optional), then I argue that it may be less likely that the work is subject to the GPL-3.0.