Rob Landley <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 November 2005 16:21, [email protected] wrote:
> > Amongst the various arguments here for declaring a binary kernel
> > module a drived work based on including kernel headers, please
> > take a step back and remember that what's sauce for the goose is
> > sauce for the gander.
>
> I think we've noticed the past few years of foaming looney attacks from SCO,
> yes. And Microsoft's own attempts to license its header files, and such.
[...]
> > Do I want
> > them to claim proprietary rights in the source code because it refers
> > to symbols defined in their headers?
> Are those symbols documented? Or did they have to deeply study a
> copyrighted work in that claims rights over derived works in order to
> find out about those symbols in the first place?
To /study/ a copyrighted work to find out how it works and then write code
against what you learned, you are /not/ copying anything. Sure, the
original code's license might forbid such activities, but in Linux' case it
certainly doesn't.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
