[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox +code
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:14:43 GMT, Alan Cox said:

> 3. "If you distribute the source then I won't supply you updates"

Intellectually interesting, but somewhat moot, as at least one person has
quoted Sveasoft's *actual* requirement as:

"If you distribute the *non-GPL* pieces of our pre-release, then we won't
supply you updates".

which is *totally* another kettle of fish (and they're totally in their rights to
do so, *as long as the non-GPL parts are really non-GPL*). I've leave others to
argue about the commingling of GPL and non-GPL and whether their drivers are
NVidia-ish (where the closed parts are quite arguably *not* derivative works,
and there's a GPL'ed shim), and therefore more-or-less tolerated, or if their
"non-GPL" code is actually derivative of some GPL kernel code (and thus a big

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.103 / U:6.164 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site