From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Dec 19 18:43:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 745FD37B41A for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012D9C3B2; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26530; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:18 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBK2htL65879; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:43:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Jonathan Lemon Cc: Brett Glass , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GPL nonsense: time to stop References: <200112182010.fBIKA9739621@prism.flugsvamp.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011218180720.00d6e520@localhost> <20011219091631.Q377@prism.flugsvamp.com> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 19 Dec 2001 18:43:55 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20011219091631.Q377@prism.flugsvamp.com> Message-ID: <0en10ey5jo.10e@localhost.localdomain> Lines: 35 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jonathan Lemon writes: > E.g.: kernel + (N)"options XXX" = non-GPL'd kernel. > kernel + (N)"options XXX" + "options EXT2FS" = GPL'd kernel. > > > We are in agreement here, right? (Can you get your mail reader to not use tabs? I can't get my mail reader to quote them correctly and I doubt if many can. Thanks.) We are not in agreement. When you have the second equation, you must also have: kernel = GPL'd kernel and (N)"options XXX" = GPL'd (N)"options XXX" and therefor you will have kernel + (N)"options XXX" = GPL'd kernel. You can't distribute a whole (a GPL term) under the GPL without distributing its parts under the GPL. It seems like basic logic to me. Nothing to do with the GPL. Please explain carefully if you disagree. Now, you might be able and willing to dual-license all of those parts and wholes (except anything that is not yours to change licensing on) under both BSDL and GPL, but I think all are not willing and so you won't be able. And if we're willing to accept Eben Moglen's theory of "mere aggregation" as reliable for even cases he's not involved in, then there might be some scheme whereby you could show that you just have two separate programs communicating, rather than a single staticly- or dynamically-linked program. (I don't see the difference in copyright law, but then I probably won't be asked.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message