From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261719AbTLUObL (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Dec 2003 09:31:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263178AbTLUObK (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Dec 2003 09:31:10 -0500 Received: from mail.shareable.org ([81.29.64.88]:48263 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261719AbTLUObG (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Dec 2003 09:31:06 -0500 Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 14:30:43 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier To: James Morris Cc: Albert Cahalan , linux-kernel mailing list , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [OT] use of patented algorithms in the kernel ok or not? Message-ID: <20031221143043.GJ3438@mail.shareable.org> References: <20031221105333.GC3438@mail.shareable.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org James Morris wrote: > This approach would turn Linux into proprietary software. You're saying a Linux kernel with _more_ capabilities that I and everyone else outside the USA can use, learn from, modify and distribute freely is proprietary, whereas denying me access to those capabilities is more free? I guess it is more free for people living within the patented economic zones, and less free for people outside them. To put it into perspective: I'd love for Mandrake or SuSE or Polish or Red Flag Linux to come with a full suite of modem, DSL and wireless drivers, and support for VFAT and Longhorn filesystems. There's two ways to go about it: 1. First way is we develop a common Linux kernel which everyone in the USA may use, even if it contains things like encryption which are not so legal in some other parts of the world. This is obviously how it's done right now. Mandrake, SuSE, Polish, Red Flag and everyone else outside the USA must apply the Big Linux Patch to build kernels which support all the extra devices and filesystems. 2. Second way is to include all those extra wireless drivers etc. in the common kernel, but disable them somehow for USA users. Note that the USA users have not lost anything. Distributing the code in disabled form _may_ not be legal in practice, I simply do not know, so maybe the second way is not permissible. But if there is a chance it is permissible, don't you think it should be explored? -- Jamie