On 1/20/06, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/20/06, Andrew Donnellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are some (bad) parts in the linux kernel that are not GPL, and > > even some parts which could be considered non-free. Look through the > > individual file copyright notices. > > Sorry, but under Moglen's own theory, it is enough to have a tiny piece > of GNU GPL'd code to make the entire "program" (in this case kernel > "as a whole", user space aside for a moment [RMS includes that as well])
Yes. > GNU GPL'd. And, BTW, how come that the FSF's "compliance lab" didn't > purify the kernel of *GNU*/Linux? Because FSF doesn't own any copyrights in Linux - it doesn't contribute. andrew -- Andrew Donnellan http://andrewdonnellan.com http://ajdlinux.blogspot.com Jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------- Member of Linux Australia - http://linux.org.au Debian user - http://debian.org Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484 OpenNIC user - http://www.opennic.unrated.net
