Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 13:26:23 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <3C1A6E7F.3CF2E0EB@mindspring.com> References: <3C186EA5.4EA87656@mindspring.com> <20011213093555.76629.qmail@web21107.mail.yahoo.com> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <3C1875D6.5DE4F996@mindspring.com> <1id71idej9.71i@localhost.localdomain> <3C1875D6.5DE4F996@mindspring.com> <20011213051012.Y56723-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <3C1875D6.5DE4F996@mindspring.com> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <20011214122837.O3448@monorchid.lemis.com> <3C19807D.C441F084@mindspring.com> <5ipu5i9u0w.u5i@localhost.localdomain> <3C19D716.3FC77047@mindspring.com> <c58zc5a68o.zc5@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Gary W. Swearingen" wrote: > If I understood your argument there, that's a different issue which I > wasn't addressing there. You seemed to be saying in the prior message > that the combination of BSD-licensed code with GPL-licensed code in a > derivative whould cause the BSD-licensed code to become contaminated and > come under the GPL and thus the two are incompatible. I was just trying > to say that BSD-licensed code is always BSD-licensed code, even if a > derivative in which it appears is GPL-licensed (or even closed-source- > licensed) and the two licenses are not incompatible. The problem with this is that you are only licensed to use the GPL'ed code if you meet the terms of the GPL, which means that the code it is linked with is GPL'ed. We are not talking "mere aggregation" when we talk about linking, and unfortunately, the code in question is GPL'ed, nor LGPL'ed. Please see the following for why the distinction is important: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html It is a specific discussion of the properties of programs linked against GPL'ed code. > As for what a derivative is and what 17 USC means by "based upon" and > whether distribution of a FreeBSD kernel capable of loading a GPL kernel > module makes the kernel a derivative of the module, all are issues I'd > rather leave for another day. They disagree with your conclusion? 8^) 8^) > > Forgive me if I don't want to be the test case for your legal theory, > > particularly when it disagrees with those of the highly paid IBM > > lawyers who did the 6 month due dilligence on the Whistle acquisition. > > I guess you're tiring of this and prefer to just make reference to > higher authority, but that's better than nothing. I've saved the > reference in case I ever find it important enough to research. Please see the reference above. It is the philosophical underpinning of the GPL vs. LGPL debate, which applies to the JFS code in this case. I think perhaps you just need to read the FSF's list of "incompatible licenses": http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C1A6E7F.3CF2E0EB>