Re: The worst that can happen to GPLed code

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> 
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> > [...]
> > > So you have discovered that Linus changed his mind in the last 10
> >
> > Yeah. It's just fun to watch it. The latest hit: "As it is, the kernel
> > requires modules to tell it their license, and if you lie to it, that
> > is not only potentially violating the DMCA, it's also likely a crime
> > under regular copyright laws (ie you are knowingly misrepresenting a
> > license - in this case the license of the binary part, and that's not
> > legal either)."
> 
> Care to explain how Linus could have taken the DMCA into account in 1995?

Eh? Your latest hit: "Of course an aggregation is a derivative of the 
original works, and the parts are covered by the individual copyrights. 
But it is only where the combined work becomes an inseparable whole 
that is beyond the scope of copyright law's aggregation clauses that 
the terms of the GPL demand that the combination as a whole is 
licenced under the GPL." And the one before it: "If I write a letter 
with a poem in it to you, you are not allowed to pass it on to 
somebody else without my permission." I'm your fan, dak.

regards,
alexander.