On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 12:32:08PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> I strongly nak that. If you combine two object files (e.g. foo.o, bar.o)
> that have different licenses, the resulting object file (comb.o) IMHO
> constitutes a combined work, and hence the GPL should be applied to all of
> it. That obviously "does not work" - what good is a GPL comb.o file if you
> don't have the source to bar.o?
Gaaah. This is why it's a bad idea to try to attempt to do GPL
"enforcement" in kernel code. Your reasoning is totally bogus. GPL
is only about distribution, and if a user is building a standalone
module which they never distibute, the provisions of GPL won't apply,
since it's only about distribution, and a user who builds an ATI or
Nvidia module in the privacy of their own home won't be violating the
GPL.
- Ted
-
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]
