Re: GPL violations by wireless manufacturers

[Horst von Brand]

"David Schwartz" <[e-mail]> said:
> > In response to DS:
> 
> > > So is a Linux distribution "a whole which is a work based on the" Linux
> > > kernel? Would you argue that RedHat can't include proprietary
> > > software on
> > > the same CD as the Linux kernel? All the software on the CD,
> > > assuming it's
> > > Linux software, likewise extends the kernel through a
> > > well-defined boundary.
> 
> > No, definitely not. If that were the case, SuSE and Lindows etc. etc.
> > would not be able to distribute proprietary software together with
> > GPL'ed software. The GPL calls this 'mere aggregation':
> 
> > "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the
> > Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a
> > volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other
> > work under the scope of this License."

> 	But they're not just on the same CD. The additional work extends
> the Linux kernel and is useless without it (or without something that
> emulates it).

Just like Oracle, or Opera, or my sendmail binary, or a lot of other
stuff. That they would be useless without Linux doesn't make them GPL. The
GPL is quite clear; the head penguin also clarified that propietary modules
are OK.

Now can we please stop this? If there is something to discuss around this,
it is clearly _not_ kernel development.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: [phone]
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              [phone]
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  [phone]