Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261297AbVC2TAn (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:00:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261301AbVC2TAm (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:00:42 -0500 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.168]:58634 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261297AbVC2TAe (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:00:34 -0500 From: "David Schwartz" To: Cc: "Wichert Akkerman" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Sean" , "Mark Fortescue" Subject: RE: Can't use SYSFS for "Proprietry" driver modules !!!. Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:00:30 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:59:45 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:59:46 -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1709 Lines: 40 > On Mar 28, 2005, at 20:53, David Schwartz wrote: > > The GPL explicitly permits you to modify the code as you wish, and this > > includes removing any restriction or enforcement type code. > Yeah, sure, one could remove the technological enforcement, but IIRC the > thread also brought up that you _still_ couldn't distribute anything > that > _used_ the broken type enforcement, because changing the source code to > include the comment "This is Public Domain!" likewise doesn't make it > so. The GPL specifically permits unrestricted functional modification and distribution. So you cannot violate the GPL by modifying and distributing the resulting modifications (except perhaps by altering or removing the text of the GPL itself). The GPL contains no technical restrictions or software enforcement mechanisms. While you could add some to GPL'd software, you could not prohibit their removal. That would be an "additional restriction", which the GPL forbids. Since the GPL permits their removal, removing them cannot be circumventing the GPL. Since the GPL is the only license and the license permits you to remove them, they cannot be a license enforcement mechanism. How can you enforce a license that permits unrestricted functional modification? Perhaps you could make an argument if the code only restricted things specifically prohibited by the GPL. But the GPL also permits unrestricted usage, so it's not clear how this could happen. DS - 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/