Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au!news.apana.org.au!cantor.edge.net.au!news.teragen.com.au!news.access.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.iquest.net!not-for-mail From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@freebsd.org> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs whatever Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:48:47 -0500 Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine Lines: 27 Message-ID: <32EE905F.446B9B3D@freebsd.org> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5c155c$p6u@raven.eva.net> <5c19pg$rf6@lynx.dac.neu.edu> <5c39sk$ddl@troma.rv.tis.com> <5c8jlm$50u@cynic.portal.ca> <m23evrulla.fsf@desk.crynwr.com> <32EA25AB.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <5qC7y0gTzDLB091yn@ibm.net> <32ECB442.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <32ED1866.34F02393@indiana.edu> <5cla2m$ikn@innocence.interface-business.de> <5cld5k$prc@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT i386) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:154828 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2086 Brian Wheeler wrote: > > In article <5cla2m$ikn@innocence.interface-business.de>, > j@ida.interface-business.de (J Wunsch) writes: > >Lars Hofhansl <lhofhans@indiana.edu> wrote: > > > >> Anyway if you provide work based on Linux, you don't have to provide > >> source for any new program you wrote. > > > >But you would have to provide the source code of your own kernel > >extension, for example, since the entire kernel is GPL'ed, and your > >extension would count as ``derived work'' in the sense of the GPL. > >I.e., you are restricted in the freedom to chose a copyright for your > >work -- that's why John continues to write that it is less free. > > If the kernel extension is distributed as a module, then it doesn't > have to include source. From what I've heard, Linus has stated that if a > module uses only the defined module interface, then its not a derivative work > and therefore not subject to source sharing. > "From what I've heard" doesn't work in court. I have "heard" that also, but who owns the title and copyright to the entire Linux kernel? Can Linus actually give you that relief? Refer to the applicable copyright and credits and try to interpret who really wrote and owns the code. John