Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> said:
I would just like to remind people that there are not two (Fedora and
non-free) kinds of package, but three, the totally free (Fedora), the close
source but legal (fglrx and similar vendor drivers), and the only legal in
the free world, restricted in fascist countries.
I mention this because vendor drivers, while not open source, are free and
legal to use and redistribute. So let's not talk about rpmfusion and *forge
software as illegal, much of it is not, even in the USA.
Aside from calling the US fascist (which is a little over the top,
Save it for some politics group, anyone who doesn't think scanning phone
conversations and email without warrant and torture are okay should go to
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh. This is not the place.
especially since the US isn't the only country that has allowed and/or
enforced the stupid patents), you're wrong on another point. A number
of the closed source kernel modules are of questionable legality (and
not just in the US), because they may be derived works of the Linux
kernel. A derived work of the kernel must be GPLv2, which can't be
closed source.
This has been discussed on the LKML, please read there. The last opinion I saw
of any authority said that using header files did not make it a derived work.
Please discuss that elsewhere.
The point I was making is that fglrx and libdvcss are not remotely the same,
software can be closed source and legal, or open source and illegal (in some
places). Your obfuscation does not negate my premise.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
