On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 15:43 -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > > Writing code that needs wrappers is not derived work, if that code can > > also have wrappers for BSD, QNX and perhaps Windows. > > Just because it works with another O.S. doesn't mean it is not derived > from Linux code. Good grief. Try your lawyer, or at least a Google > search for something like "copyright derived work", for a better idea > of what "derived" means. >
So you are saying that a stand alone section of code, that needs wrappers to work with Linux is a derived work of Linux? If there's some functionality, that you make, and it just happens to need some kind of operating system to work. Does that make it a derived work of any operating system? OK, I took your advise and found this from googling: http://www.pbwt.com/Attorney/files/ravicher_1.pdf It's a good read (I recommend you to read it), and it goes back to one of my first points, and that is the interpretation of a derived work is basically up to the judge that is handling the case. There's nothing set in stone here. It covers mainly US copyright law, and that's what I'm mainly concerned with. Unless you misunderstood me, and thought that I was talking about taking some part of Linux and making it work under another OS, I still stand by my statement. -- Steve - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
