Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 12:33:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 12:33:31 -0500 Received: from [194.213.32.137] ([194.213.32.137]:1028 "EHLO bug.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 12:33:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20001202175035.A253@bug.ucw.cz> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 17:50:35 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Alan Cox , "Dr. Kelsey Hudson" Cc: "Henning P. Schmiedehausen" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fasttrak100 questions... In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i In-Reply-To: ; from Alan Cox on Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 08:42:18PM +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > You are wrong: If you modify the kernel you have to make it available for > > anyone who wishes to use it; that's also in the GPL. You can't add stuff > > No it isnt. Some people seem to think it is. You only have to provide a > change if you give someone the binaries concerned. Some people also think > that 'linking' clauses mean they can just direct the customer to do the link, > that also would appear to be untrue in legal precedent - the law cares about > the intent. This is currently happening with lucent winmodem driver: there's modified version of serial.c, and customers are asked to compile it and (staticaly-)link it against proprietary code to get usable driver. Is that okay or not? Pavel -- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/