From: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
To: <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 13:30:21 -0800
In-Reply-To: <200302122046.h1CKkXpk009417@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Monta Vista software license terms
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Message-ID: <20030212213022.AAA17490@shell.webmaster.com@whenever>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2587
Lines: 63

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:46:33 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 12:18:39 PST, David Schwartz said:

[snip]

>So you don't even get the right to *CREATE* a derivative work unless
>it's
>explicitly given to you.  So you're back to the GPL (clause 2) -

	I already addressed this. There is no way to use source code other 
than to create derivative works.

	Please, explain to me how you use a header file other than to create 
derivative works. Explain to me how you use the gcc source code other 
than to compile it into a derivative work. For source code, there is 
no distinction between use and the creation of derivative works. 

	Source code is a recipe. You use it to create some form of end 
product, which is a derivative work. You can't have the right to use 
a recipe without the right to produce and eat whatever the recipe is 
for.

>2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
>of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
>distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
>above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

>You can slice-and-dice *YOUR* copy to your heart's content, but if
>you
>distribute it, you have to abide by the conditions.  Note that at
>least
>in the US, the submission of patches is probably covered by 17 USC
>107,
>which is the "fair use" clause - patches are obviously "criticism or
>comment" ;)

	As I already explained, you don't need this clause to give you the 
right to distribute modified works because this right is the simple 
sum of rights you already have.

	You already have the right to produce derivative works. You already 
have the right to distribute the original work. You already have the 
right to distribute the modifications. Your recipient already has the 
right to use and possess the original. There is no additional right 
to the original work for this section to give you. The right it seeks 
to give you is the simple sum of rights you already have.

	"Distributing derived works" is not a specific right under any 
copyright law I know of. It's the sum of other rights. You need some 
rights to the original and some rights to the derivation. I'm saying 
you already have all the rights to the original you need without 
section 2.

-- 
David Schwartz
<davids@webmaster.com>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/