> Oleg Goldshmidt <ogoldshmidt(at-nospam)computer.org Wrote: > > > One recent controversy involved MOSIX, who allegedly violated GPL by > > hacking the kernel itself rather than sticking to writing modules. > > We in the MOSIX team did not violate any copyright or do anything illegal: > It is true that parts of our software did not comply with the GPL, > but there was no reason they should have.
Violation is indeed too harsh a word and inapropriate. but there was a license change which came about after some discussions with Linus and friends, or so I've heard? > > The software we released in the first versions of MOSIX for Linux-2.2.x > could be divided to 5 different categories: > <details snipped> > Since our binary module did not contain anything from Linux, we > could issue > it in any way we pleased: we did not even need to consider the GPL or > obtain any license or permission from anybody whatsoever. Again, I am no lawyer, but the "official" GNU/FSF standpoint as I understand is that the fact that module links against a GPLed work (the Linux kernel) means in is considered a "derived work" of the Linux kernel and therefor can only be published under the GPL. So, if you accept the FSF interpertation of the GPL (and they did write it) then you are wrong, because that binary module linked ( when loading) aginst a GPL module ( the kernel). Regardless, I think that GPLing MOSIX was a good idea in all respects, but that's just me ;-) -- Gilad Ben-Yossef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tel: +972(9)9717330 | Fax: +972(9)9717334 | Cel: +972(54)756701 Kagoor Networks ltd | http://www.kagoor.com | ================================================================To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
