Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966462AbXIBMum (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 08:50:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965714AbXIBMuc (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 08:50:32 -0400 Received: from fresno.net.uniovi.es ([156.35.11.2]:55857 "EHLO FRESNO.NET.UNIOVI.ES" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965686AbXIBMua (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 08:50:30 -0400 Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 13:20:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Igor Sobrado Subject: Re: Fwd: That whole "Linux stealing our code" thing In-reply-to: <20070902113638.78fbd202@the-village.bc.nu> To: Alan Cox Cc: "Constantine A. Murenin" , Adrian Bunk , Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200709010140.l811eq9H005896@cvs.openbsd.org> <46D99FB7.6030505@garzik.org> <20070901205457.GK9260@stusta.de> <20070902113638.78fbd202@the-village.bc.nu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1948 Lines: 45 On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Alan Cox wrote: > You can shout this all you like but you would be wrong. You can remove > the licence if you have permission to do so. For the ath c files there > was permission to do so. There was permission to do so from Reyk Floeter? Really? > Your understanding isn't quite right. One of many things you may get with > dual licensed code is the right to pick a licence from several choices, > you may also get the right to remove some choices from the recipient. Reyk code was never dual licensed! His code is under truly free licensing terms (BSD). > A work that combines GPL and BSD licensed material is not the same as a > work which says I may choose between two licences. If both licences must > always apply (which is a perfectly possible condition to put in a > licence) then putting such a "both" GPL/BSD licence piece of code into > OpenBSD would require any OpenBSD distributed containing it was GPL > licenced when conveyed, which I am *very* sure is not the intent. > > Thus what you appear to be doing by putting the ath5k C code in OpenBSD is > conveying it under the BSD licence (making a choice between the two > offered) and conveying a right for parties down the chain to convey it > under one of the licences only. I think that Theo explained this point clearly quite a few times in the last days. > And as we've already established the header files are quite different. Is a simple change in the header files a reason to vindicate the people that changed the licensing terms? Obviously, it isn't. > Doesn't mean its not somewhat rude but illegal and rude are two very > different things. No, because this change is both rude and illegal. Igor - 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/