Re: freed_symbols [Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]]

[Andre Hedrick]

Roman,

You got my point exactly, keep the issue of license to GPL and not muddy
the waters with a license other than GPL as an example.

David's "Creosote Public License" is an example how an author using such a
license could require the enduser to conform to his/her wishes,
regardless.

His "Creosote Public License" adds restrictions not permitted or covered
by the scope of GPL.  So generating examples of how that license empowers
the author to impose extra restrictions and then saying it is equal to GPL
by association is not helping to clear the mudd.

Sorry if I was not clear about the direction of the message.

Cheers,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Roman Zippel wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> 
> > We can make up the Monica Public License too, but because it is GPL, your
> > added restrictions of whatever are NULL and VOID.
> 
> Could you please explain about what "added restrictions" you're talking 
> about? Let's actually look at the GPL, which states "You may not impose 
> any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted 
> herein.", a bit earlier we find "Activities other than copying, 
> distribution and modification are not covered by this License".
> So how exactly does EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL restrict you in these activities?
> 
> bye, Roman
> 
> -
> 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/
> 


-
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/