linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706201959110.31603@asgard.lang.hm>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Michael Poole <mdpoole@...ilus.org>
cc:	davids@...master.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Michael Poole wrote:

> David Schwartz writes:
>
>>> However, compilations (even to the extent they are creative
>>> combinations) are not necessarily derivative works of their elements.
>>> For more details, see
>>> http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html#compilations
>>
>> Because compilation copyrights don't really affect the Tivo and GPLv2/GPLv3
>> issue, I tend to ignore them when discussing that subject. If you think I'm
>> wrong and there is some relationship between them, please let me know. I
>> admit I may not have given that possibility enough thought.
>
> I believe compilation copyrights do bear on GPL-licensed software, by
> virtue of the GPL's sentence "[...] rather, the intent is to exercise
> the right to control the distribution of derivative _or collective_
> works based on the Program." (emphasis added).
>
> There is a lot of grey and/or arguable area about what constitutes a
> GPL-encumbered collective work versus mere aggregation.  Although I
> disagree, I understand and respect that some believe that the kernel
> plus a digital signature over it is "mere aggregation".  I would like
> to focus the discussion on that question, though, rather than whether
> the GPL is worded to control the rights to compilations-in-general
> that include GPLed works.

if the GPL can excercise control over compilations, then if Oracle were to 
ship a Oracle Linux live CD that contained the Oracle Database in the 
filesystem image, ready to run. then the GPL would be able to control the 
Oracle Database code.

if the GPL can't do this then it can't control the checksum either.

again, it's not just the kernel that's part of the checksum on a tivo, the 
checksum is over the kernel + initial filesystem, much of which contains 
code not covered by the gPL)

David Lang
-
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/