| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 04:46:13 +0800 From: Tim Post <tim.post@...kinetics.net> To: Michael Poole <mdpoole@...ilus.org> Cc: Tomas Neme <lacrymology@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:25 -0400, Michael Poole wrote: > Tomas Neme writes: > > >> A "computer program" is a set of statements or instructions to be > >> used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring about > >> a certain result. > >> -- US Code, Title 17, Section 101 > > > > so? > > People keep arguing that the signature is somehow not part of the > kernel or not subject to copyright law. I suspect they do not realize > how broad the legal definition of "computer program" is. "A computer program is a set of statements or instructions used by a computer." I have no idea what logic was employed that made continuing beyond that point desirable. However, the GPL was designed so you couldn't be forced to pay to use the software released under it, my guess is if it weren't for such a broad definition the GPL would look a bit different than it does. When laws give you ground that gets you free stuff, typically its unwise to suggest that they take some back ;) Best, --Tim - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists