From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263861AbTJEUFn (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 16:05:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263866AbTJEUFn (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 16:05:43 -0400 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:18048 "EHLO lapdancer.baythorne.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263861AbTJEUDa (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Oct 2003 16:03:30 -0400 Subject: Re: freed_symbols [Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]] From: David Woodhouse To: Andre Hedrick Cc: Rob Landley , "Henning P. Schmiedehausen" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1065384197.3129.4.camel@lapdancer.baythorne.internal> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-2.dwmw2.2) Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 21:03:17 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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