<snip>
> so, do people think inlining the original licenses in their 
> entirty sufficient in cases, like Bsearch, where i've 
> subsumed another peice of work?  at what point of 
> modification does one stop considering a peice of work 
> 'derived' and simply consider it a re-implementation and 
> therefore 'new' work?
> 
> any pointers appreciated.  btw.  my goal here is simply to 
> share the code while respecting the original authors 
> intentions - i could care less what people do with my code 
> (although i release under ruby's license) so that's not the issue.
> 

Determining if something is a derivative or not is really the deciding
factor here. I believe that copyright effectively states that as long as a
layperson can identify the work as being derived from the original, than it
still is derivative. That language is somewhat vague, but points out the
fact that it's not experts in the field in question that we use to judge if
a work is derivative or not, but "the common person" (which becomes a bit
difficult to define when we're talking about code and not a painting... But
that's another topic altogether).

Depending on where you want to put your focus - the license or the code -
you could try to take the code that you're using from elsewhere and put it
all in it's own lib with extensive comments on it's license and where you
obtained it. That way you can keep your own code separate and possibly
licensed how you'd like if you so desire.

Hope that's useful.

-M