On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 06:00:43PM -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > Temporarily setting aside the questions I raised elsewhere about > whether any kernel copyright holder has legal standing to complain, I > believe it goes back to the argument whether the "mere aggregation" > clause applies.
Here's the sentence which uses the phrase "mere aggregation": In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License. I think this is pretty clear. Let's say that A is a GPL'd work and B is some other work. If A and B are both parts of the same program, then the "mere aggregation" sentence does not provide an exception. If A and B are not parts of the same program -- for example, if they are two separate programs in the same archive -- then the "mere aggregation" sentence does provide an exception. -- Raul
