Re: Common misunderstanding of the GPL

Some added potential complications can be seen in Linus' take on 
"derived works" as that term might apply to kernel modules.

See the discussion at:

http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/1735

where he says regarding kernel modules/drivers:

"Basically:
 - anything that was written with Linux in mind (whether it then _also_
   works on other operating systems or not) is clearly partially a derived
   work.
 - anything that has knowledge of and plays with fundamental internal
   Linux behaviour is clearly a derived work. If you need to muck around
   with core code, you're derived, no question about it."


PDW

Jay Maynard wrote:

>On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 12:31:48PM -0500, Hall, Ken (IDS ECCS) wrote:
>  
>
>>In view of the opinions expressed by the Hercules developers concerning
>>the GPL, I think this article might be of interest.  The relevant item is
>>near the bottom of the page.
>>
>>http://lwn.net/Articles/60455/
>>    
>>
>
>I believe I am among the first to have raised a concern over the viral
>nature of the GPL. I know I was the one who first coined the term GNU Public
>Virus, in an article in gnu.misc.discuss in 1989. (See
>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4%26VSZ:%40splut.conmicro.com
>for the original.)
>
>I fundamentally distrust Eben Moglen's discussion of the GPL's possible
>effects. He is clearly motivated by a desire to see the world adopt the GPL
>as its standard license, and so has a great incentive to minimize the risks
>involved. Further, even though he's promising, in effect, to forbear from
>demanding that other code be licensed under the GPL, there's on way to hold
>him to that promise. As another article on the same page notes, nothing -
>*NOTHING* - is guaranteed once you get to court.
>
>Finally, and most tellingly, is that this article represents a shift in
>position. Until now, everyone has been aying that the GPL is enforceable -
>in fact, gets its enforceability - from contract law. Now, Eben Moglen comes
>along and says "forget all that, it's really copyright law and has been all
>along". Huh?! Since when? Why the sudden change?
>
>The GPL advocates would like nothing more than to destroy the possibility
>that software could be distributed under other than their terms. They're
>losing that battle, as people realize just what the GPL is and does, and
>that there are many other options for Open Source that do not demand that
>others follow the Stallmanites' utopian ideals. Now, they're trying to make
>everyone think that it's not the big problem it had been seen as in the
>past. Personally, I just flat don't buy it.
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/dpFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/