lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe:
    No its not, doing something similar to (or identical) to a GPL'd program 
    is fine, if you were to use a GPL'd IRC server/client as the base for
    your own code, then you'd need to pblish using the GPL...

    IRC would be in the realm of software patents really - it's a protocol -
    the client/serverside code comes under copyright laws :)

    --Oliver

    gmack@innerfire.net wrote:

    >From gmack@innerfire.net Fri Dec 5 12:36:11 2003
    >Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1)
    > by localhost with SMTP; 5 Dec 2003 17:36:11 -0000
    >Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:36:11 -0500 (EST)
    >From: Gerhard Mack <gmack@innerfire.net>
    >To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
    >cc: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu,
    > Peter Chubb <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    >Subject: RE: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?
    >In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312042245350.9125@home.osdl.org>
    >Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312051232530.16547@innerfire.net>
    >References: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKMEIDIHAA.davids@webmaster.com>
    > <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312042245350.9125@home.osdl.org>
    >MIME-Version: 1.0
    >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
    >X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-104.5 required=4.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,SUBJ_ENDS_IN_Q_MARK,USER_IN_WHITELIST version=2.20
    >X-Spam-Level:
    >
    >Those views are scary when you consider that webmaster Inc sells closed
    >source software that works exactly like IRC (wich is GPL)
    >
    >On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:58:09 -0800 (PST)
    >>From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
    >>To: David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
    >>Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, Peter Chubb <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au>,
    >> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    >>Subject: RE: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, David Schwartz wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>The GPL gives you the unrestricted right to *use* the original work.
    >>>This implicitly includes the right to peform any step necessary to use
    >>>the work.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>No it doesn't.
    >>
    >>Your logic is fundamentally flawed, and/or your reading skills are
    >>deficient.
    >>
    >>The GPL expressly states that the license does not restrict the act of
    >>"running the Program" in any way, and yes, in that sense you may "use" the
    >>program in whatever way you want.
    >>
    >>But that "use" is clearly limited to running the resultant program. It
    >>very much does NOT say that you can "use the header files in any way you
    >>want, including building non-GPL'd programs with them".
    >>
    >>In fact, it very much says the reverse. If you use the source code to
    >>build a new program, the GPL _explicitly_ says that that new program has
    >>to be GPL'd too.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Please tell me how you use a kernel header file, other than by including
    >>>it in a code file, compiling that code file, and executing the result.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>You are a weasel, and you are trying to make the world look the way you
    >>want it to, rather than the way it _is_.
    >>
    >>You use the word "use" in a sense that is not compatible with the GPL. You
    >>claim that the GPL says that you can "use the program any way you want",
    >>but that is simply not accurate or even _close_ to accurate. Go back and
    >>read the GPL again. It says:
    >>
    >> "The act of running the Program is not restricted"
    >>
    >>and it very much does NOT say
    >>
    >> "The act of using parts of the source code of the Program is not
    >> restricted"
    >>
    >>In short: you do _NOT_ have the right to use a kernel header file (or any
    >>other part of the kernel sources), unless that use results in a GPL'd
    >>program.
    >>
    >>What you _do_ have the right is to _run_ the kernel any way you please
    >>(this is the part you would like to redefine as "use the source code",
    >>but that definition simply isn't allowed by the license, however much you
    >>protest to the contrary).
    >>
    >>So you can run the kernel and create non-GPL'd programs while running it
    >>to your hearts content. You can use it to control a nuclear submarine, and
    >>that's totally outside the scope of the license (but if you do, please
    >>note that the license does not imply any kind of warranty or similar).
    >>
    >>BUT YOU CAN NOT USE THE KERNEL HEADER FILES TO CREATE NON-GPL'D BINARIES.
    >>
    >>Comprende?
    >>
    >> Linus
    >>-
    >>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/
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >--
    >Gerhard Mack
    >
    >gmack@innerfire.net
    >
    ><>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
    >-
    >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/
    >
    >

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.031 / U:156.964 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site