Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-30 Thread Alan Cox
> I'll assume for the moment that I'm liable to suffer some form of brain > h=E6morrhage and go along with this dastardly plan - so enlighten me. H= > ow > would I conspire with M-Systems to do so? Not a lot. Even if you joined M-Systems you could make no difference. In fact as it stands now M-Sy

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-30 Thread David Woodhouse
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > See section 7 of the GPL. "If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all." But I can, so I may. See t

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-30 Thread David Woodhouse
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Mark Spencer wrote: > Now firstly, let's eliminate the ISDN red-herring from consideration > because the authors of the code do not place any additional restrictions > on the GPL whatsoever, they simply bring it to your attention that using > an un-certified ISDN stack may be

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-28 Thread Jeff V. Merkey
Alan Cox wrote: > > > In this case, Debian (or any organization who isn't big enough not to fear > > M-systems) may not ship the standard kernel because it has additional patent > > restrictions. > > Why. There are no distribution restrictions > > > There is a clear ability here for the autho

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-28 Thread Alan Cox
> In this case, Debian (or any organization who isn't big enough not to fear > M-systems) may not ship the standard kernel because it has additional patent > restrictions. Why. There are no distribution restrictions > There is a clear ability here for the author of the driver and m-systems to >

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-28 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 05:24:19PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > The authors of the NTFL layer dont place any additional restrictions on your > use of the code either. They are merely warning you that if you use it in > some ways you are going to get your ass kicked by a third party. WHats the > differ

Re: Linux-2.4.0-test9 not Open Source

2000-10-28 Thread Alan Cox
> Now firstly, let's eliminate the ISDN red-herring from consideration > because the authors of the code do not place any additional restrictions > on the GPL whatsoever, they simply bring it to your attention that using > an un-certified ISDN stack may be illegal in some countries. The authors o