Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 21:39:42 +0300 From: Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>, Josh MacDonald <jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU>, Parity Error <bootup@mail.ru>, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com Subject: Re: [reiserfs-dev] Re: metadata update durability ordering/soft updates Message-ID: <3C9E1D6E.3080604@namesys.com> References: <20020317225759.82774.qmail@web21109.mail.yahoo.com> <3C95ACBA.4040108@namesys.com> <3C95B838.F8ECE39A@mindspring.com> <3C95C8C3.7080803@namesys.com> <3C966CDF.25A7A379@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: >Hans Reiser wrote: > >>>>You can port it for free if you port it to a GPL'd OS (or port the OS to >>>>the GPL). >>>> >>>Or you can port it and then use it on any OS you want, so long >>>as you are an end user, and not a company who sells OSs, so >>>long as you don't redistribute the result... the GPL doesn't >>>kick in until you attempt to exercise distribution rights. >>> >>This is often said, but not what the license language says. I think it >>is wishful thinking. If you distribute, you must make it public. That >>includes FAPSI, NSA, anyone. >> > >Precisely. So you can port it, and the result of the port >is still GPL'ed. At that point, you can treat it like any >other GPL'ed code that the original vendor had ported. > >You do the port, buy you don't distribute it, so you are not >required to make sources available. You merely use the port >internally. > >Alternately, you do the port, you distribute it, but you do > distribute means what? > >not distribute it linked against your proprietary code. You >make the end user do the linking, if they want to use it. By > There is absolutely nothing in the license that makes derivative specific to linking issues. > >optioning it, you are off the hook for making your proprietary >source code available, but the end user is not. Since the >end user never had your source code, the end user can not >distribute the combined code further. > No, you have made a derivative work. That you linked it only through a surrogate means nothing. Consider what will happen as we move to NUMA/cluster/distributed computing architectures. Linking will become less and less meaningful, because programs will be composed into wholes much as functions are composed into wholes currently. This is perhaps why the GPL doesn't say that if it isn't linked, it is okay. I think it is a real problem that people can't easily get a good authoritative definition of what is and is not a derivative work when they need to make their decisions. Hans To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C9E1D6E.3080604>