Re: New licence and driver SDK ?

Ed Cogburn wrote:
[...]
> The rest of that article does go on to discuss the whole binary module
> "problem" with Linux, but the Linksys issue appears to be over, and again, it
> happened without anyone challenging the GPL.

Aha. So Cisco and others aren't really violating the GPL by 
distributing products that contain binary only ("proprietary") 
code linked with the holly GPL'd stuff. Right or wrong?

[...]
> Again, that is an issue that won't be really decided until the courts weigh in
> on what a "derivative work" specifically is, and where the boundaries lie.

In the totally perverse FSF'd world your car is a derivative work 
of its gas pedal. Give me a break. To me, Moglen&Co are bunch of 
hypocrites. How can the apparent followers of Benjamin Tucker
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe023.pdf proclaim 
on one hand the "triumph of anarchism" 

http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/my_pubs/anarchism.html
(Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of Copyright)

and, on the other hand, behave as if they have the right to 
exclude others who merely link to their stuff? Well, you might 
want to read various relatively recent court opinions like 
http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/125_F3d_580.htm and 
try to extrapolate it to software and the issue of linking.

regards,
alexander.