Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:14:53 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | RE: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? |
| |
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, David Schwartz wrote: > > >But what they do NOT have the right to do is to create derivative works of > >the kernel, and distribute them to others. > > Yes, they do. Since they have the right to create the derived work and have > not agreed to the GPL, the only thing that could restrict their distribution > is the law, not the GPL. Please show me the law that permits a copyright > holder to restrict the distribution of derived works.
I'm not going to argue with you any more. I am not a lawyer, and clearly you aren't one either (or you're a really really bad one).
The "show me the law" is USC 17. It's called "US Copyright Law". As a copyright holder in the Linux kernel, I _do_ have the right to restrict the distribution of derived works. That's what copyright law is all about.
Your arguments are just vacuous and stupid.
I _very_ much have the right to restrict the distribution of derived works, and that is what a license is all about. Without a license to distribute, you have NO RIGHT AT ALL to distribute a derived work. What's so hard to understand about that? And the only rights you have are rights granted to you in some license.
And that license in this case is the GPL. Which does NOT grant you rights to redistribute derived works without the source being available under the same license.
End of discussion. You can whine all you like, but whining has never changed reality.
Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |