Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

[David Woodhouse]

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 06:09 -0800, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> Can we stop with the stupidity?

I'm not sure which part you think is stupid. Do you:

1. Disagree with my paraphrasing of the GPL, in the first two
   paragraphs? 

2. Disagree with the obviously correct statement that the GPL 
   makes requirements about the licensing even of non-derived 
   works?

3. Disagree with my example, given in the final two paragraphs, 
   which makes it clear that a copyright licence _may_ make 
   restrictions on the licensing of even non-derived works. Note
   that although my example is a licence where the licensee must
   release _all_ future work under the same licence, I'm not
   claiming that the GPL does this; I only claim that such a 
   licence is _possible_.

-- 
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/