@ 16/06/2004 20:48 : wrote Thiemo Seufer :
>Joe Wreschnig wrote: [snip] > >>When you compile a kernel, the firmware is included in it. When you >>distribute that compiled binary, you're distributing a work derived >>from the kernel and the firmware. This is not a claim that the >>firmware is a derivative of the Linux kernel, or vice versa. Rather, >>the compiled binary is a derivative of both. >> >>For someone to claim that data compiled into a program but not >>executed is "mere aggregation" is nonsense. Is a program that prints >>the source code to GNU ls (stored as a string constant in the program, >>not an external file) a derivative of GNU ls? Of course it is. This is >>*exactly* analogous to the situation with firmware. > > >Could you please explain how exactly the derivation works in this case? >And please bring forward some more convincing arguments than "this is >nonsense", "this is obvious", or some broken analogy. > > >Thiemo >
There is none. Said program would be a compilation (anthology), not a derivative. There is no "nonsense" on it. Anthologies are not derivative works. Period. Firmware are not derivatives on any kernel. Kernels, including or not the firmware, are not derivatives on them. If kernel include some firmware, it's an anthology including that firmware. Not a derivative work. Can't even be considered a derivative work by way of linking and GPL-binding (see my other email, last paragraph of gpl.txt etc.)
-- br,M
