Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755947AbXFOPxt (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:53:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753920AbXFOPxl (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:53:41 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.232]:8087 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753751AbXFOPxj (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:53:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Luowi4rNdCw7X15pMu7S6SvGCzJS6FPHujyBpR+1s/DaPIavL+3xNj21NOi3S6dxNH35icbV/EDosiHjeZ9OIDox1XVQxD+ZsmMloMyprlWKNOo5OyFEyjDxTXlNXCktkRviuxrzsr9KWosjk7qLASAlZOP2cwimZowC9gUuKR4= Message-ID: <4672B5F6.706@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:53:26 -0400 From: Florin Malita User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0b2 (X11/20070116) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Poole CC: Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Alexandre Oliva , Linus Torvalds , Lennart Sorensen , Greg KH , debian developer , "david@lang.hm" , Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 References: <200706142246.57583.dhazelton@enter.net> <878xal2a0q.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <200706150127.18069.dhazelton@enter.net> <87sl8tzaj1.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <20070615124039.GB21120@elte.hu> <87fy4tz8dc.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> <20070615143003.GA8775@elte.hu> <87zm31xo3q.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> In-Reply-To: <87zm31xo3q.fsf@graviton.dyn.troilus.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1577 Lines: 37 On 06/15/2007 10:56 AM, Michael Poole wrote: > The GPL cares about the key > used to generate an integral part of the executable form of the GPLed > work. GLPv2 doesn't: why do you think the digital signature is an integral part of the executable? It can be a totally separate blob, distributed via a separate channel and even stored at a different location than the executable. Does it still look like an integral part of the executable to you then? (unless of course you're trying to argue that the hash itself is a derivative work, but that has already been refuted many times before.) > The executable does not function properly if it lacks that > part. It works just fine given the right environment. The right environment may be some other hardware (without DRM restrictions) or the DRMed device + an authorized digital signature. The digital signature is not part of your executable. Do you honestly believe GPLv2 requires the distributor to provide you with the right environment for your modified copy to "function properly"? I would say it doesn't, but feel free to point me to specific sections which *state* otherwise. AFAICT, GPLv2 is specifically limited to "copying, distribution and modification". How you use (or don't use, or can't use) your modified copy is totally outside its scope. --- fm - 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/