On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 08/19/2015 08:37 PM, Fernando Rodriguez wrote: >> >> What's the purpose of these quotes? >> Neither of them says it doesn't allow steps 1-3. Instead of doing selective >> reading you should read the whole thing. If that's too much just read the >> first >> few questions under "General understanding of the GPL" on the FAQ. >> > > The point was that the GPL doesn't allow shit unless the copyright > holders grant you the license in the first place. >
And they have, in writing. You can copy the kernel all you want under the terms of the GPL. If you want to redistribute the kernel or a derivative work of it, then you need to also distribute your sources. A binary module author isn't doing that, so they don't need anybody's permission. You only need a license to do things that are forbidden by copyright law. In general you can't bind licenses to unrelated activities. I can't say that you have the right to use my software as long as you don't beat your wife. Well, I can say it, but no court would enforce it. Likewise you can't give somebody permission to use GPL software under the condition that they don't distribute other software which has nothing to do with your software other than containing a few symbol names in the linking table. Try this exercise. Go buy a Quran. Now replace every occurrence of the word "Mohammed" with "Fred." This email is now dynamically linked to a book that I've never bought or read. Are you going to argue that this email is a derivative work of the Quran? Suppose I told you to grab your scientology bible and rip out page 3. Is that now grounds for me to be sued by the Church of Scientology, on the basis that I just cross-referenced their copyrighted work? After all, I did quote one of their page numbers. -- Rich
