Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On Jun 15, 2007, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:
>> 
>> If the DRM signature and program executable are coupled such that they
>> are not useful when separated, the implication to me is that they form
>> one work that is based on the original Program.  This is beyond the
>> GPL's permission for "mere aggregation".

> So you want to make things like a 160-bit SHA1 hash of a binary be a 
> "derived work" of that software?

How about the combination of the software binary with the hash?

Considering that the hash is a functional part of the software, as in,
if you take that out, it no longer works?

> If that were to seriously be an FSF argument,

Remember: I don't speak for the FSF, and I don't speak for FSFLA, just
like I don't speak for Red Hat.

Just like you shouldn't redirect your qualms with the FSF to me, you
shouldn't direct your qualms with me to the FSF.  That would be very
wrong.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
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/