Kyle McDonald <kmcdon...@egenera.com> wrote:
> Arguably that line might even be shifted from the act of compiling it,
> to the act of actually loading (linking) it into the Kernel, so that
> distributing a compiled module might even work the same way. I'm not so
> sure about this though. Presumably compiling it before distribution
> would require the use of include files from the kernel, and that seems a
> grey area to me. Maybe clean room include files could be created?
In Germany/Europe, we have something called "Wissenschaftliches Kleinzitat",
in the USA, there is "fair use". For this reason, I don't believe that
using include files or calling kernel functions is a problem.
Also note that the FSF was asked by the Open Source Initative on whether
the GPL follows the 10 rules from the OSS definition at:
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
The FSF did reply to the OSI that the GPL has to interpreted in a way that
makes it OSS compliant.
I would like to direct you in special to section 9 of the OSS definition.
People who claim to see problems usually ignore the rules from the OSS
definition or from the Copyright law.
Also, looking at the substanciations of the adjucations from the lawsuits
driven by Harald Welte shows that the German judges have the same doubts
about the legality of many claims from the GPL as you see in the GPL review
from Lawrence Rosen in http://www.rosenlaw.com/Rosen_Ch06.pdf
I would be relaxed even if I did plan to ship ZFS binaries for Linux.
If in doubt, ask a specialized completely independend lawyer.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
