On Jun 9, 2008, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > the tg3 file may be available on its own from your own tree. So, before gNewSense cleaned up the kernel in a way that ended up being called linux-libre, it didn't exist as a separate work to be aggregated into other works and result in linux-2.6.25.tar.bz2? And then, since it clearly wasn't the case that these works released under the name linux-libre were combined with a bunch of firmwares to form the non-libre linux releases (there's a causal loop in there somewhere), how does the fact that it's accidentally available from my own tree matter? That's not how copyright works, and you know that. >> > and also on the boundaries of contract created by copyright. >> >> ?!?!? Copyright does not create contracts. Copyright creates > Bingo.. and copyright does not give you power over other works Nobody's talking about power over other unrelated works. We're talking about derivative works formed by combining together multiple works. There's no doubt that copyright does give the holder power over this case. The only possible doubt is whether the combination forms a copyrightable work. > I do not need your permission to put your book on the same bookcase > as someone elses book. The result is clearly not a copyrightable work. > Nor do you have any standing to impose restrictions relating > to other works via copyright. True, but this is a distraction. Nobody's restricting other works. The issue the debate was turned into is whether the GPLed work can be distributed in this way. The more people insist 'taking it out will break', the weaker the 'mere aggregation' defense becomes. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} FSFLA Board Member ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
