Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:48:14 -0500 | From | Jeff Epler <> | Subject | Re: GPL violations: make it harder |
| |
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:23:34PM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > For patches to be licensed otherwise would require that someone > write some nasty scripts to patch the kernel given explicit line > numbers, etc... and it is likely possible in theory, but doubtful > that anyone would ever do it due to the effort involved and the > brown stuff that would come back at them from an ethical point. > > I'm glad you brought up this point indeed! Good thinking!
Actually, I've considered a form of diff/patch which represented context and deleted lines by their md5sum. Thus, the diff only contains long hex strings plus code that I wrote. (My actual desire was to figure out a way that I could release QuakeC modifications under the GPL, when the base QuakeC source was not GPL. I hope there's no ethical brown stuff involved in that desire!)
Or is md5sum(line N of file) a derivative work of file? If so, what duty do I have under the GPL if I tell you md5sum(line N of GPL'd file)?
God, this stuff gets too weird when you start thinking about it.
Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |