From: "Stuart MacDonald" <stuartm@connecttech.com>
To: "'Alan Cox'" <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: <root@chaos.analogic.com>, "'James Clark'" <jimwclark@ntlworld.com>,
       "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: Driver Model
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 11:13:58 -0400
Organization: Connect Tech Inc.
Message-ID: <003d01c3722d$ffe1d1b0$294b82ce@stuartm>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <1062601073.19058.70.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 850
Lines: 21

From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org 
> You could equally ask the same question about any other measure - its
> no different to "I could shoot the shopkeeper and not pay", its an
> incentive to behave, a way for developers to make it clear their code

That's what I figured, I just wanted to check.

> isnt for stealing and without denying people the choice of what they
> run. The reputable vendors on the whole not only seem to obey it but
> actually put informative MODULE_LICENSE() tags into their code for
> their proprietary licenses.

Any examples off the top of your head? I'm curious.

..Stu

-
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/