Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:58:25 +0000 |
| |
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 04:42 -0800, Andre Hedrick wrote: > Would you be kind enough to list "some circumstances" ?
You have a work which is not derived and can reasonably be considered an independent and separate work in itself, but instead of distributing it as a separate work you distribute it as part of a whole which is a work based on a GPL'd Program.
The precise meaning of 'as separate works' and 'part of a whole which is a work based on the Program' isn't entirely unambiguous.
The GPL tries to clarify it by ruling out 'mere aggregation...on a volume of a storage or distribution medium' but stating its intent to control 'collective works'. There's still a little scope for interpretation though.
My point, however, was that a copyright licence _can_ make such requirements. It _can_ require you to bathe daily in creosote too, and if you don't like that you have the option of not using the software which is licensed that way.
> Also the authoritative (sp) reference supporting the list.
Section 2 of the GPL, which I quoted only moments ago.
-- dwmw2
- 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/
| |