Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261305AbUKFDac (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:30:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261301AbUKFD3S (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:29:18 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:4356 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261307AbUKFD0Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:26:16 -0500 Subject: RE: Possible GPL infringement in Broadcom-based routers From: David Woodhouse To: davids@webmaster.com Cc: "Jp@Enix. Org" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 03:23:24 +0000 Message-Id: <1099711404.27598.44.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3.dwmw2.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2679 Lines: 57 On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 11:59 -0800, David Schwartz wrote: > If that were true, I could poem up on a billboard and sue anyone who read it. Your analogy is flawed. Consider instead the case where you want to sue not someone who _read_ it, but someone who copied it down into their notebook, went home and then published an anthology of poems including yours. > The FSF is, of course, free to take any position it wants to. As I > understand the law, if you want to restrict use, you must restrict access. > Give free access, you give free use. Adam said 'an activity that is restricted by copyright', and in the context it's blindingly obvious that he means _copying_ and _distribution_, not just use. Yet you persist in your misdirection. Anyone copying and distributing the Linux kernel must comply with the copyright licence which _conditionally_ grants them permission to do so. In particular, the permissions granted by the GPL on the Linux kernel are conditional on your agreement that when you distribute a collective work which is based in part on the Linux kernel, you also release all other parts of that whole, EVEN THOSE WHICH ARE NOT DERIVED WORKS OF THE KERNEL, under the terms of the GPL. The GPL does not claim any fundamental 'rights' to those parts which are your own work, just as commercial copyright licences don't claim any fundamental 'right' to your money. It's just a trade you are offered; that is what is asked of you, in return for permission to distribute the GPL'd work. You have the right to refrain from entering that agreement; to refrain from distributing the GPL'd work. You do not have the right to distribute the GPL'd work _without_ complying with the terms of its licence. That would be a criminal offence. Anyone distributing a work which is a whole based on the Linux kernel and other non-GPL'd works, other than 'mere aggregation on a volume of a storage or distribution medium', is quite clearly violating the terms of the GPL. (Bearing in mind the specific exception for userspace). It's very clear, given that the firmware for these routers is completely useless without either the kernel or the network driver modules, that it's more than 'mere aggregation' -- the parts form a coherent whole. Thus, even when the modules are NOT a 'derived work', they _MUST_ be distributed under the terms of the GPL in order for permission to distribute the _kernel_ to be granted. -- dwmw2 - 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/