lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license
From
Date
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:17:06 PDT, Junio C Hamano said:

> under GPL, but even if it did, I do not think they have any
> obligation to give us the source. GPL says "You may do such and
> such provided if you do so and so" but that is all about the
> Licensee. It does not talk anything about what the copyright
> holder may, may not, nor must do :).

Remember however that it's *really* difficult to create a kernel module
that's not a derivative work of the kernel - and for *that* side of
the fence, they are indeed a licensee of the kernel source tree, not
the copyright holder of their code....


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.091 / U:1.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site