RE: GPL license and linux kernel modifications

["David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>]

> On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:25:55 +0300,
> =?koi8-r?Q?=22?=Bansh=?koi8-r?Q?=22=20?= <bansh21@mail.ru>  said:

> Yes, but it has to be the *preferred* source form.  So you have
> to distribute
> what you're actually using to maintain the system.  You want to claim that
> the very tricky code is your preferred form, go right ahead.  Let
> me know how
> the first time you try to fix a bug goes. ;)

> It is most certainly *NOT* allowed to pass your code through a obfuscator
> before shipping it out.

	In my insanest musings, I've thought about a case where one has a
decrypting/encrypting editor and a decrypting compiler. This could honestly
make the encrypted source the preferred form for the purposes of making
modifications.

	Anyone who attempts this would likely run afoul of a legal principle known
as the "straight face doctrine". This says that one may not make any
argument in court unless one can do so with a straight face. Because of
this, lawyers that can say rather insane things with perfectly straight
faces are quite highly prized.

	DS