Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

[Aron Rubin <arubin@atl.lmco.com>]

Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 03:05:03PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> You may license *your* work under whatever terms you want.  Those terms
> can't extend to things that aren't your work in a copyright license.
> You need a contract to do that and even then there are limits to what
> you can do.

At the horrible risk of getting involved in something here, I would like 
to point out that the process of creating a "derived work" would be a 
use of the original. Therefore, restrictions placed on the original 
about usage would not apply directly to the derived work, but they would 
apply to the process of creating the derived work.

Aron

-- 

ssh aron@rubinium.org cat /dev/brain | grep ^work:

Aron Rubin                       Member, Engineering Staff
Lockheed Martin                  E-Mail: arubin@atl.lmco.com
Advanced Technology Laboratories Phone:  856.792.9865
3 Executive Campus               Fax:    856.792.9930
Cherry Hill, NJ USA 08002        Web:    http://www.atl.lmco.com