Ask Slashdot: Does A Software License Cover Patches? Misc.6/5/2000; 7:10:08 AM March 19, 2000: Ask Slashdot: Does A Software License Cover Patches?: I bring up this article because I believe some of the arguments apply to the question of whether or not Third Voice and other such things are modifying a page, as what Third Voice does is essentially patch a page.(Note that not all of them apply, as programs aren't exactly the same things as communications in general, but some still apply.)

I point you to this post for the 'derivative work' position, "Good patches need to include some of the original code to be able to apply with context. . . To me they sound like they are a dirivitive[sic] work." I also liked this point: "...what is the end result after a patch is applied. It is without arguement[sic] a derivative work covered by the original codes' license." I hadn't really thought of it that way that clearly, but I believe that it is true for Third Voice as well: "What is the end result of Third Voice's manipulations? It is without argument a derivative work covered by the original expression's copyright."

The right answer is probably expressed in this post: The lawyer's answer: "it depends".