lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]
From
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 03:30:35PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
> If the work would not have been restricted without it and is restricted
> with it and you can't remove it, it's an additional restriction. If not,
> what would an additional restriction be?

You can remove it. But if you remove for with the obvious purpose
of abetting the distribution of non-GPL derived work, don't be
surprised to get smacked by courts who don't care for your technical
sophistry.

> > Its merely showing the intent of the author.
>
> The intent of the author has no bearing on whether or not a work is
> derived.

I've noticed it's become common to say this, but (NAL) I doubt it's
true. I would expect a court to respect the author's intent within
some narrow range that would otherwise be ambiguous. Intent and
community standards play a large role in law. If enough people wear
a path across private property, it can become an easement.

Andrew
-
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 13:48    [W:0.558 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site