Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-23,: Re: [LINUX-ABIT] Re: ABIT -- GENTUS Linux Steals GPL CODE AGAIN!!

# Re: [LINUX-ABIT] Re: ABIT -- GENTUS Linux Steals GPL CODE AGAIN!!

Aaron D. Turner (aturner@pobox.com)
Wed, 7 Jun 2000 23:30:21 -0700 (PDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Werner Almesberger: "Re: [RFC] union-mount stuff"
- Previous message: James Sutherland: "Re: [LINUX-ABIT] Re: ABIT -- GENTUS Linux Steals GPL CODE AGAIN!!"

James,

Considering how many free hosting for open source projects there are
(SourceForge comes to mind), why not just start a project for your
"emergency boot floppy" and upload the kernel source. Won't cost you one
cent to do so.

That or talk to Richard Stallman and convince him that this requirement in
the GPL is stupid. (Good luck!)

Complaining about the GPL requirements on linux-kernel isn't going to help
you any.

    --
    Aaron Turner           | Either which way, one half dozen or another.
    aturner@pobox.com      | http://www.pobox.com/~aturner/
    Linux Knowledge Base   | http://www.linuxkb.org/
    "There is no worse tyranny than to make a man pay for something he does
    not want merely because you think it would be good for him."
    -Benjamin Franklin

    On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, James Sutherland wrote:

    > On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Rahul Sinha wrote:
    >
    > > On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
    > >
    > > > I'm not talking about Abit specifically, my point is that the GPL is
    > > > excessively restrictive. For example, it prevents me from distributing a
    > > > pre-built emergency repair disk; WTF does this achieve??
    > >
    > > this is not the case; so long as sources are available electronically or
    > > upon request (for free) you are complying with the GPL
    >
    > Clause three gives three options:
    >
    > 1. I include the source with the binary.
    >
    > 2. I include a written offer to supply the source at cost at any time in
    > the next three years.
    >
    > 3. IF I received the program as a binary only package, accompanied by an
    > offer under paragraph 2, I can just include a reference to that offer, IF
    > I am distributing the code on a non-commercial basis.
    >
    >
    > Paragraph 3 does not apply. Paragraph 1 would mean the *I* had to
    > distribute copies of all the source I use. Paragraph 2 would be an
    > unacceptable burden (OK, no-one is going to take me up on the offer, I
    > hope - still, it's not an offer I want to make.)
    >
    >
    > I can't see what's wrong with distributing a compiled kernel alone,
    > provided the source is actually available freely; that's not what the GPL
    > says, though.
    >
    >
    > James.
    >
    >
    > -
    > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    >

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Werner Almesberger: "Re: [RFC] union-mount stuff"
- Previous message: James Sutherland: "Re: [LINUX-ABIT] Re: ABIT -- GENTUS Linux Steals GPL CODE AGAIN!!"