LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>
Cc: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] alternative aproach to: Ban module license tag string termination trick
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 06:54:12 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070203115412.GA15419@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0702031213220.27840@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>

On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 12:32:08PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> I strongly nak that. If you combine two object files (e.g. foo.o, bar.o)
> that have different licenses, the resulting object file (comb.o) IMHO
> constitutes a combined work, and hence the GPL should be applied to all of
> it. That obviously "does not work" - what good is a GPL comb.o file if you
> don't have the source to bar.o? 

Gaaah.  This is why it's a bad idea to try to attempt to do GPL
"enforcement" in kernel code.  Your reasoning is totally bogus.  GPL
is only about distribution, and if a user is building a standalone
module which they never distibute, the provisions of GPL won't apply,
since it's only about distribution, and a user who builds an ATI or
Nvidia module in the privacy of their own home won't be violating the
GPL.   

						- Ted

  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-03 11:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-03  2:08 Bodo Eggert
2007-02-03  8:14 ` Russell King
2007-02-03 11:38   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-02-03 19:56   ` Alan
2007-02-03 20:12     ` Randy Dunlap
2007-02-03 11:32 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-02-03 11:54   ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2007-02-03 14:04   ` Bodo Eggert
2007-02-03 19:47     ` Alan
2007-02-03 20:02 ` Alan
2007-02-05 13:08   ` Bodo Eggert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070203115412.GA15419@thunk.org \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=7eggert@gmx.de \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
    --cc=jonathan@jonmasters.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH/RFC] alternative aproach to: Ban module license tag string termination trick' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).