RE: Possible GPL infringement in Broadcom-based routers

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

On Sat, 2004-11-06 at 12:09 -0800, David Schwartz wrote:
> 	This is exactly the argument I hoped would *not* arise on the LKML. I'll
> try not to reply further unelss someone posts something fundmanetally new.
> 
> > Anyone copying and distributing the Linux kernel must comply with the
> > copyright licence which _conditionally_ grants them permission to do so.
> 
> 	*sigh* We're not talking about anyone copying or distributing *the* Linux
> kernel. We're talking about someone copying or distributing another work
> that is derivative of the Linux kernel (which is also *a* Linux kernel, just
> not *the* Linux kernel). This is true whether they distribute the module
> separately or linked with the Linux kernel. In either case, they are not
> distributing the actual work placed under the GPL but a distinct, yet
> derivative, work.

Ah, OK. So as long as they change one line of code in the kernel, it's a
derivative work and they're no longer required to comply with the GPL?
They don't even need to use binary-only modules; they can put their own
proprietary code into their kernel, and distribute it how they like?

An interesting opinion.

-- 
dwmw2