Le Lun 16 juin 2008 15:35, Chris Adams a écrit : > > Once upon a time, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: >> On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 08:17 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: >> > The compiled kernel image is just a mechanical production from the >> > source and does not have copyright of its own. >> >> Excellent. So I can distribute that bzImage without heed to the >> provisions of copyright law? I don't need permission from the people >> who wrote it at all? > > No, just like a CD image, the copyright of the various source bits > still > applies. It is not a derivative work though, only a mere aggregation. You don't get to decide what is "mere" aggregation and what is collective works no matter how convenient that may be for you. Just like the notion of "derived" works those are very specific legal terms and they are defined by the lawmaker intent not by the technical guy classification. What matters is not the tools used (a bunch of bytes on a common medium, a knife) but how they are used (mere aggregation/collective works, preparing a meal/wounding someone). Now can you all please stop stuffing the list and have your preferred lawyer give you a course on derived works, collective works and mere or not mere aggregation? -- Nicolas Mailhot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
