On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 04:56:50AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [quoting me] > > >> No, it is completely wrong to say that the object file is merely an > >> aggregation. The two components are being coupled much more tightly > >> than in the situation that the GPL discribes as "mere aggregation". > > > Would you maintain this position even if the firmware is identical > > across operating systems and the Linux driver is identical across different > > firmware builds for different hardware implementations? > > Yes I would. Linking forms a tighter coupling than just placing the > two parts side by side on a filesystem designed for general storage of > byte streams. There is more to say about the situation than the naked
So, why didn't you say it when i posted my analysis to debian-legal a month ago and asked for comments ? > fact that that they are aggreated on the same medium; ergo the > sutiation does not constitute *only* aggregation, and the "mere > aggregation" language of the GPL does not apply. > > In particular, the end of GPL #2 does not provide a blanket exception > for all forms of aggregation; it specifically speaks about aggregation > "on a volume of a storage or distribution medium". Read my argumentation, comment on it, and be prepared to consider the same copy of the firmware as a derived work if shipped on a prom on the device itself. Friendly, Sven Luther - 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/
