Re: freed_symbols [Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]]
From: David Woodhouse
Date: Sun Oct 05 2003 - 15:07:56 EST
On Sun, 2003-10-05 at 12:21 -0700, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> David,
>
> It is about the fact that Linus on his own set a position that modules are
> permitted.
It is indeed. And about that fact that by the time he made that
declaration, he was not in a position to make it unilaterally.
> Now if you want to take the position that one can not modify
> and redistribute the modified kernel in source, you are imposing a
> restriction.
A restriction in this case which I assert was present in the original
licence; not an 'additional restriction'.
If I wanted to distribute my code without restrictions, I'd have
contributed to a BSD kernel, or released my code under the terms
"GPL but not if you really really don't fancy it".
I don't. I didn't.
> If I wanted to be rude, I could take the changes I made and copyright the
> combined work and make it so others could not use that version without
> permission.
Not without being in violation of the original licence. This isn't about
the resulting combined work, but about your permission to use the
_original_.
> Neither you or I can do anything, provide the vendor who is using Linux
> publishes their source fork. I also dare you to stop them, because you
> can't.
Believe me, there are ways this can be achieved.
--
dwmw2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/