lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linus Speaks About KDE-Bashing
On Sun, 12 Jul 1998, Alan Cox wrote:

> > Actually, this is already happing today, whenever dynamic
> > linking is used to load a propietary application and load it on
> > a GPLed operating system or whenever a propietary operating
> > system loads GPLed code.
>
> Only if they dont have direct dependancies. There is precedent
> here of sorts although it never went to court. Please review
> the Objective C and NeXT incident in detail

I have spent half an hour looking for this and I can't find
anything. Could you provide a URL or describe it yourself?

Also, in the course of my searches I naturally looked at
www.gnu.org. They have *nothing* there at all dealing with past or present
situations where the GPL has had conflicting interpretations and how those
situations were resolved. Pretty important stuff, no? Might be useful
for people with the same sorts of proplems to be able to consult past
precedents, mightn't it? One wonders if they are reluctant to admit that
there has ever *been* any conflicts over conflicting interpretations of
the GPL, or even that such conflicts are a possibility.

> > you from providing a mechanism (a script for example) that
> > enables the user to do this linkage without requiring him to
> > know about what he is doing. And you may even provide such a
>
> The law is actually not as dumb as you imply.

The law has not yet had a chance to give an opinion on this one
way or the other yet.

> Your script for
> example is a linking mechanism and you are providing it linked

By whose definition of "linking"? Yours? Why does your opinion
(or mine, or anyone else's) mean anything?

> > Or look at what happened with Be: They may have infected part of
> > their system with GPLed code, but since that system is a highly
> > modular microkernel, this infection is not really relevant,
> > since the infected component is extremely self-contained. On the
>
> > other hand, it's disclosure is of almost no value to the Open
> > Source community without disclosure of the noninfected rest of
> > the operating system.
>
> Be had a few problems actually, they had to correct their illegal
> use of GPL code and sort things out appropriately.

Their "correction" involved providing the source to those GPLed
drivers with their OS distribution. Nothing else.

Jon

---
'Cloning and the reprogramming of DNA is the first serious step in
becoming one with God.'
- Scientist G. Richard Seed


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:1.633 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site