From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263564AbTLJPF2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:05:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263568AbTLJPF2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:05:28 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.86.99.235]:44949 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263564AbTLJPFY (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:05:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? From: David Woodhouse To: Larry McVoy Cc: Andre Hedrick , karim@opersys.com, Linus Torvalds , Kendall Bennett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20031210144612.GA19357@work.bitmover.com> References: <1071066315.5712.344.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <20031210144612.GA19357@work.bitmover.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1071068703.5712.398.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-8.dwmw2.1) Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:05:03 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 06:46 -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > Unless I need more coffee (which is certainly possible, it's early), > yeah, I disagree with this. A contract could do this but a copyright > based license doesn't seem like it can. Why so? I can license my work under whatever terms I please. I certainly can't force you to _accept_ the terms of my licence -- you always have the option to decline -- but in that case you may not use my work. -- dwmw2