Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 5 Sep 2000 19:59:01 -0700 (PDT) | From | dean gaudet <> | Subject | Re: GPL violations: make it harder |
| |
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> If even one file in the kernel source gets modified, then the entire > patch is GPL via the GPL assimilation rules in COPYING - regardless of > what the author of the patch says.
IANAL.
i know this is what the GPL wants, but AFAIK it's never been tested in court.
while there are continued attacks on our rights in the US -- such as microsoft and others trying to make shrinkwrap licenses enforceable, i believe it is still the case that there are some rights that you have to explicitly wave (by signature for example), no matter what a contract says.
i can't say whether there are some rights that definitely apply here -- and i doubt that it'll really be known until this goes all the way through the court system.
but, for example, we all own rights to our words -- and have to explicitly give up those rights.
another example -- someone reading enough linux-kernel can compose many patches or otherwise suggest modifications to the kernel without ever having downloaded the source, or used the kernel, or otherwise "agreed" to clause 5... simply because this mailing list, and our transactions on it do not include the approriate copyleft notices on them.
also, there could be conflicts with contracts which you have signed with employers -- which typically give up a bunch of your rights, even in fields "unrelated" to your work field. only the courts can decide which contract wins in the case where an employee of Big Company publishes a patch which uses Big Company's intellectual property. the NPL/MPL try to cover this with the patent clauses -- but watch out, there's now even big business laws governing trade secrets intended to deal with corporate espionage (fortunately the laws seem difficult to enact, 'cause they're real ugly... see one of the CACM issues from this summer).
there's grey areas. maybe it's changed recently -- but in the past the FSF itself recognized these grey areas by requiring you to explicitly register a signed document with them before they could accept your patches.
you can make the grey a little less grey by explicitly granting rights to your own creations.
-dean
- 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/
|  |