Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:36:34 +0100 |
| |
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 14:29 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > the argument is quite strong that the linking of two independent works > is "mere aggregation" as well. (as long as they are truly separate > works)
You think so?
If even linking was considered 'mere aggregation on a volume of a storage or distribution medium', then when would the 'But when you distribute those same sections as part of a whole...' bit _ever_ apply? It _explicitly_ talks of sections which are independent and separate works in their own right, but which must be licensed under the GPL when they're distributed as part of a larger whole.
I don't see how we could hold the view that _even_ linking is 'mere aggregation on a volume of a storage or distribution medium', without conveniently either ignoring entire paragraphs of the GPL or declaring them to be entirely meaningless.
Of course, that doesn't mean that a court _wouldn't_ do that. Given enough money, I'm sure you could get US court to declare that the world is flat. But it doesn't seem to be a reasonable viewpoint, to me. Or a likely outcome.
-- dwmw2
- 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/
| |