Messages in this thread | | | From | Dmitry Torokhov <> | Subject | Re: GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox +code | Date | Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:26:39 -0500 |
| |
On Wednesday 10 November 2004 06:09 pm, Kyle Moffett wrote: > On Nov 10, 2004, at 16:11, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > That web page seems pretty clear... some parts of the prerelease are > > non-GPL, you can distribute the GPL code as usual. Unless there is > > some claim that the non-GPL parts are derived from GPL original > > source or contain GPL code, why shouldn't they restrict the > > distribution > > of their own code? > > The make it difficult if not effectively impossible to separate the two, > claiming that therefore they are not under the restrictions of the GPL. > However, the GPL _clearly_ states that if it is distributed as a single > work, then all parts _must_ be distributable under the terms of the > GPL. I believe that a single binary firmware image is a single "work" > according to the definition provided in the GPL, and therefore by > distributing their code as a part of it, they have implicitly applied > the > GPL to said work (assuming it was not GPLed already for other > reasons). >
No, no, no. Firmware image here is the same as a CD that you receive from a distribution and is mere an aggregation.
-- Dmitry - 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/
| |