Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:31:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:31:48 -0500 Received: from ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.74.60]:32491 "EHLO ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:31:46 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 21:41:29 +0000 From: Derek Fawcus To: David Schwartz Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Monta Vista software license terms Message-ID: <20030212214129.C14019@edinburgh.cisco.com> References: <200302122046.h1CKkXpk009417@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <20030212213022.AAA17490@shell.webmaster.com@whenever> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20030212213022.AAA17490@shell.webmaster.com@whenever>; from davids@webmaster.com on Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 01:30:21PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2073 Lines: 51 On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 01:30:21PM -0800, David Schwartz wrote: > 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. [ ... ] > 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. and I gave you (off list) details of why this fails wrt UK law. 16(1)(a) reserves copying, 16(1)(b) reserves redistribution, and 16(1)(e) reserves adaption, together with copying and redistributing adaptions. So taken together they have removed all of the above, and require that one has a licence to do so. Then 50C gives back some limited rights wrt computer programs. Namely that one can make such copies and adaptations as one needs in order to use the program. However, importantly it does _not_ give back any redistribution rights, so they still require a licence. This should meet your requirement for a jurisdiction who's law limits what your are suggesting. Hence to redistribute a program with patches applied needs a licence. DF - 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/