Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 10 Dec 2003 06:46:13 -0800 | From | Larry McVoy <> | Subject | Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? |
| |
On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 02:25:16PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > 3. Disagree with my example, given in the final two paragraphs, > which makes it clear that a copyright licence _may_ make > restrictions on the licensing of even non-derived works. Note > that although my example is a licence where the licensee must > release _all_ future work under the same licence, I'm not > claiming that the GPL does this; I only claim that such a > licence is _possible_.
Unless I need more coffee (which is certainly possible, it's early), yeah, I disagree with this. A contract could do this but a copyright based license doesn't seem like it can. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |