Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262710AbTFYC2e (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:28:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263493AbTFYC2e (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:28:34 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:25814 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262710AbTFYC2d (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:28:33 -0400 Message-Id: <200306250242.h5P2g3ef002657@eeyore.valparaiso.cl> To: "David Schwartz" cc: vanstadentenbrink@ahcfaust.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL violations by wireless manufacturers In-Reply-To: Message from "David Schwartz" of "Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:18:15 MST." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.1; nmh 1.0.4; XEmacs 21.4 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:42:03 -0400 From: Horst von Brand Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1900 Lines: 41 "David Schwartz" said: > > In response to DS: > > > > So is a Linux distribution "a whole which is a work based on the" Linux > > > kernel? Would you argue that RedHat can't include proprietary > > > software on > > > the same CD as the Linux kernel? All the software on the CD, > > > assuming it's > > > Linux software, likewise extends the kernel through a > > > well-defined boundary. > > > No, definitely not. If that were the case, SuSE and Lindows etc. etc. > > would not be able to distribute proprietary software together with > > GPL'ed software. The GPL calls this 'mere aggregation': > > > "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the > > Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a > > volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other > > work under the scope of this License." > But they're not just on the same CD. The additional work extends > the Linux kernel and is useless without it (or without something that > emulates it). Just like Oracle, or Opera, or my sendmail binary, or a lot of other stuff. That they would be useless without Linux doesn't make them GPL. The GPL is quite clear; the head penguin also clarified that propietary modules are OK. Now can we please stop this? If there is something to discuss around this, it is clearly _not_ kernel development. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - 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/