Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:58:37 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
       Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, debian developer <debiandev@gmail.com>,
       david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@netone.net.tr>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Message-ID: <20070615125837.GA25654@elte.hu>
References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706131946.15714.dhazelton@enter.net> <20070614021619.381331dc@the-village.bc.nu> <200706132129.52736.dhazelton@enter.net> <1181859896.5211.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20070615114921.GC6269@elte.hu> <1181908678.25228.448.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070615122921.GA21120@elte.hu> <1181910994.25228.468.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1181910994.25228.468.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1508
Lines: 33


* David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:

> If even linking was considered 'mere aggregation on a volume of a 
> storage or distribution medium', then when would the 'But when you 
> distribute those same sections as part of a whole...' bit _ever_ 
> apply? It _explicitly_ talks of sections which are independent and 
> separate works in their own right, but which must be licensed under 
> the GPL when they're distributed as part of a larger whole.
>
> I don't see how we could hold the view that _even_ linking is 'mere 
> aggregation on a volume of a storage or distribution medium', without 
> conveniently either ignoring entire paragraphs of the GPL or declaring 
> them to be entirely meaningless.

as long as it's not distributed in one collective work, where is the 
problem? A driver could be argued to be part of a mere compilation of 
works (not part of a collective work), or just two separate works. But 
... this is a much greyer area than the key stuff.

> Of course, that doesn't mean that a court _wouldn't_ do that. Given 
> enough money, I'm sure you could get US court to declare that the 
> world is flat. But it doesn't seem to be a reasonable viewpoint, to 
> me. Or a likely outcome.

i'm not that cynical about US courts.

	Ingo
-
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/