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

[Tim Post <tim.post@netkinetics.net>]

On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:25 -0400, Michael Poole wrote:
> Tomas Neme writes:
> 
> >>     A "computer program" is a set of statements or instructions to be
> >>     used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring about
> >>     a certain result.
> >>     -- US Code, Title 17, Section 101
> >
> > so?
> 
> People keep arguing that the signature is somehow not part of the
> kernel or not subject to copyright law.  I suspect they do not realize
> how broad the legal definition of "computer program" is.


"A computer program is a set of statements or instructions used by a
computer."

I have no idea what logic was employed that made continuing beyond that
point desirable. 

However, the GPL was designed so you couldn't be forced to pay to use
the software released under it, my guess is if it weren't for such a
broad definition the GPL would look a bit different than it does. 

When laws give you ground that gets you free stuff, typically its unwise
to suggest that they take some back ;)

Best,
--Tim



-
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/