Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030274AbXBRB05 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:26:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030275AbXBRB05 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:26:57 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.189]:16538 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030274AbXBRB04 (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:26:56 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=F21pt7eSRsaIV3rj7vJ3fPzOQ8/IO0qBcqa+6u0VnP02D/hBww/By37aSW9i3T3NUhV6ng85fVODjGSPh2nGr6VS+43o6qWFg8m4Cz9zt66RgwXH/sdFq8MXe6+WvRhTPMMuMoOizlWH2LnoI+laxmxmVc2iC0GyPt2YCi7vEM4= Message-ID: <3d57814d0702171726l403c7812n19f2a226cba02e5d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:26:54 +1000 From: "Trent Waddington" To: davids@webmaster.com Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers Cc: "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" , "Neil Brown" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070216125353.GN13958@stusta.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1638 Lines: 29 On 2/17/07, David Schwartz wrote: > I don't think that's grey at all. I think it's perfectly clear that linking > cannot create a derivative work. No automated process can -- it takes > creativity to create a derivative work. (That doesn't mean that just because > you can link A to B, a cannot be a derivative work of B or vice verse, of > course. It just means that if A is not a derivative work of B, linking A to > B cannot make it so, nor can the result be a derivative work.) Sigh. VJ is distributing the linux kernel with proprietary extensions. If you want to argue that the proprietary extensions in isolation are not derivative works of the kernel, fine, you might have a case, but the combined work, which VJ is distributing is *clearly* a derivative work and must be distributed under the terms of the GPL. Despite which, legal bullshit is best left for lawyers.. the *intent* of the GPL is that if you distribute *any* changes, extensions or plugins for a GPL work, you do so under the GPL. The law may not allow for this to be enforced, but it shouldn't need to.. one should read the GPL as 100% enforceable and follow it without looking for "loop holes" as it is the stated desire of how the author of the code wants you to use his work. Looking for loop holes, and worse yet, discussing those loop holes in a public place, is just insulting. Trent - 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/