Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751845AbXBCXdD (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Feb 2007 18:33:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751864AbXBCXdD (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Feb 2007 18:33:03 -0500 Received: from dallas.jonmasters.org ([72.29.103.172]:3484 "EHLO dallas.jonmasters.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751845AbXBCXdB (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Feb 2007 18:33:01 -0500 Message-ID: <45C51B81.5040309@jonmasters.org> Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 18:32:17 -0500 From: Jon Masters Organization: World Organi[sz]ation Of Broken Dreams User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan CC: Jan Engelhardt , David Schwartz , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick References: <20070203222141.6f723fd9@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20070203222141.6f723fd9@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Do-Not-Run: Yes X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 74.92.29.237 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jonathan@jonmasters.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on dallas.jonmasters.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1720 Lines: 36 Alan wrote: > On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 21:47:36 +0100 (MET) > Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> On Feb 3 2007 10:31, David Schwartz wrote: >>> The way out of the GPL problem is to make clear that it is *not* a >>> copyright enforcement scheme >> So why do we have EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL then, if > > Because if you go around modifying code to get around it then regardless > of the DMCA question you are actively doing it and there is very clear > intent to do other than the right holder intended. In some ways its the > difference between walking through an open archway into a private area > and kicking the door down to get in. It's a sign, a notice, and the reason I brought up this discussion is precisely because I don't think the kernel has any business being an enforcement mechanism - that's not what the spirit of our community is really about, we're about openness (as much as is possible). If I go into an airport, open my laptop and connect to a network called "Free WiFi network", then I might have a good case to argue that I expected the WiFi to be free. If I connect to a network called "Not Free, Don't Use" then...I think the intent of the wording is clear. Anyway. Are we doing this or not - the more I think about it, the more I'm kinda "happy" to just leave things as they are. Yes, bad people will continuing doing bad things no matter what we do. Do we really want to change stuff just to work around obvious abuse? Alan? Jon. - 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/