Re: Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
  "...just see module loading as "use" of the kernel, rather than
   as linking against it."

Again, you are taking two different statements and trying to collapse them together to give it a context that does not exist

This statement was repeated in other contexts - that's just what google popped up first. Do you really believe that Linus himself did not understand exactly the context that this wording applied to? He said it specifically to clarify any doubt about the matter.

Like I said, you can repeat this all you want. The facts of the matter remains,

* Linus has repeated claimed that the copyright of derivative works depends on the specific instance

Close - he said that whether modules are derivative works at all depends on the instance - even in the quote I posted. That is, modules do not have to be derivative works. Of course they could be, perhaps by inclusion of other GPL'd material. They just aren't because they use the kernel services - or at least that was the only story in 1995.

* He is not the only copyright holder and others have expressed even more strongly their beliefs that modules are derivative work.

That's kind of irrelevant to the fact that they may not be.

* FSF is not the copyright holder and their views are not relevant to a discussion about the Linux kernel

Agreed, but Eben Moglen's opinion should be as well-versed as anyone on the topic. I certainly had no reason to disbelieve it when that was published.

* Historically, the interface between modules and the kernel were weaker and one could get away with this argument but that case is much harder to make today.

I never expected Linux to be one of those products that shipped an unusably flawed version and forced you accept different terms to get the update to something usable.

You have clearly been shown to twist facts to the extend of claiming that no license other than GPL is compatible with itself and I am not willing to argue with you anymore about this.

There is no twisting involved to point out that the 'work-as-a-whole' clause of the GPL forces exactly its own terms on all components. If you don't like to talk about that, so be it.

--
   Les Mikesell
    lesmiksell@xxxxxxxxx

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux