On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 04:05:14PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 08:07:04AM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 09:39:11PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> >
> > Thing is, if kernel.org kernels get patched to disallow binary modules,
> > whats to stop Ubuntu (or anyone else) reverting that change in the
> > kernels they distribute ? The landscape doesn't really change much,
> > given that the majority of Linux end-users are probably running
> > distro kernels.
>
> If a kernel developer or a competitor sends a cease&desist letter to
> such a distribution, the situation changes from a complicated "derived
> work" discussion to a relatively clear "They circumvented a technical
> measure to enforce the copyright.".
C&D's don't work that way. They can enforce "don't ship my code"
but not "ship my code, or else". The modification would be just like
any other thats allowable by the GPL.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
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]
