From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261943AbTJGI7E (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Oct 2003 04:59:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261905AbTJGI67 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Oct 2003 04:58:59 -0400 Received: from astound-64-85-224-253.ca.astound.net ([64.85.224.253]:58130 "EHLO master.linux-ide.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261903AbTJGI6x convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Oct 2003 04:58:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 01:56:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Andre Hedrick To: David Woodhouse cc: Larry McVoy , Pascal Schmidt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: freed_symbols [Re: People, not GPL [was: Re: Driver Model]] In-Reply-To: <1065516037.22491.267.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org We can make up the Monica Public License too, but because it is GPL, your added restrictions of whatever are NULL and VOID. So Creosote Public License, is an effective restriction that is not allowed in GPL. All your copyright under GPL grants you copyright, all other terms are in the license and adding anything to it is not allowed. Adding your views in how it should be view is your opinion nothing more. It has no legal bases and is only random noise to promote a wider grey line and more confusion. There is no standing legal decision in a court of law you can point to to use as a referrence for case law or brief/opinion from the position, officer of the court. So lets add the Rent License, you pay rent to use the GPL code I have published. Anybody who has ever stored any data on an IDE/ATA/SATA device or ATAPI attached to HOST connected to SFF cable headers of 40 pin or SFF cable PHY headers, must pay me 0.001 cents per byte transfered regardless of direction of success. This on top of GPL is a usage restriction. Have a cold shower dude, Creosote reminds me of Slick Willy. Cheers, Andre Hedrick LAD Storage Consulting Group On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 11:38 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: > > The thing that is trying to cross the boundary is the kernel license > > so what matters is if the thing which you believe should be GPLed is > > separable or not. > > Forget boundaries, Larry. Consider the case of the Creosote Public > Licence to which I referred before. That one required you to bathe daily > in creosote and release _all_ your future work under the same licence; > separate works or not. > > If you don't comply with the licence, you may not use the original work. > It's that simple -- whatever the requirements of the licence are, you > obey them or you don't have a licence. > > In the case of the CPL, it isn't a crime for you to publish your own > non-derived work under another licence, or one day to decide not to > bathe in creosote -- but it does place you in violation of the Creosote > Public Licence and hence mean that continued use of the _original_ work > is a violation of its copyright; and therefore a criminal offence. > > This is not about whether a licence _can_ demand this. We know it can -- > it can demand the ritual sacrifice of your first-born, and all that > means is that if you don't agree, you don't get to use the software in > question¹. > > This is about whether the GPL _does_ demand this. I believe that it > does, and that the user-space exception and the existence of the LGPL > make that fact entirely clear. > > -- > dwmw2 > > ¹ Admittedly, incitement to murder is an offence in most countries > but you get the point, and you still wouldn't be permitted to > use the software if you didn't do it :) > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >