Re: Switching kernel from GPL

From: Jan Rychter (jan_at_rychter.com)
Date: 07/24/03

  • Next message: Hollis Blanchard: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"
    To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    Date:	Thu, 24 Jul 2003 12:49:01 -0700
    
    
    

    >>>>> "John" == John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com> writes:
     John> There has been some discussion on the list about the possibility
     John> of getting parts and possibly eventually all of the kernel
     John> re-licensed under another license, which is in the same spirit as
     John> the GPL.

     John> Something to note is that even with the consent of all copyright
     John> holders, this may not be possible - there is at least one patent,
     John> (Read, Copy, Update), which is usable in GPL'ed code, but not
     John> necessarily in code covered by another license. That issue would
     John> need to be discussed with the patent holders.
    [...]

    I found it interesting that there was no mention of patents in these GPL
    discussions until now. The "anti-patent" clauses in the GPL and LGPL are
    quite possibly the biggest problem preventing the use of GPL'd software
    by commercial entities, much bigget than the "pass on the source and the
    rights" requirement.

    An excerpt from the GPL:

         7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent
       infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues),
       conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
       otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
       excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot
       distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
       License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you
       may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent
       license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by
       all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then
       the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to
       refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
     [...]
         8. If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in
       certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the
       original copyright holder who places the Program under this License
       may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding
       those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among
       countries not thus excluded. In such case, this License incorporates
       the limitation as if written in the body of this License.

    As I understand it (and as my legal counsel advises me) this effectively
    means that if I distribute GPL code, I have to make sure that its
    distribution and re-distribution is not restricted by patents (or other
    reasons).

    If the code in question contains parts which some patents lay claim to,
    restricting distribution, then I must not distribute the code at
    all. Furthermore, by distributing the code I breach the GPL and expose
    myself to legal threat of a lawsuit from the FSF.

    It is needless to mention that it is impossible to me to verify that no
    patents (worldwide!) lay claim to the code I'm distributing and impose
    restrictions upon its distribution.

    An example of a particularly clear case of this problem is the XviD code
    (http://www.xvid.org/), which is GPL-licensed. It seems to me that the
    authors (copyright holders, to be precise) may distribute the software
    under any license they choose, but nobody else is allowed to
    re-distribute it, because they would be violating section 7 of the GPL,
    as the MPEG-4 compression is (in some countries) covered by patents
    requiring royalties to be paid.

    This is an issue which is very often overlooked in the hot GPL
    debates. However, in the commercial world, it is possibly the most
    important one.

    --J.

    
    

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



  • Next message: Hollis Blanchard: "Re: [uClinux-dev] Kernel 2.6 size increase - get_current()?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: GETTING WORSE AGAIN.
      ... Get another server John. ... simply stores articles, Harry. ... >>tickets sold are evenly distributed. ... >>> Distribution is just accepted as being normal but remember ...
      (rec.gambling.lottery)
    • Re: Better exponentials
      ... > John D'Errico wrote: ... > equates to a fluorescent lifetime of approximately 4.9ns. ... > When I try to get an estimate for the decay constant over a larger ... a lognormal distribution for the noise ...
      (comp.soft-sys.matlab)
    • Re: GETTING WORSE AGAIN.
      ... >>> dividends from my charts, done weekly, well, intermittently. ... Get another server John. ... tickets sold are evenly distributed. ... distribution, but you think, even more ridiculously, that there's ...
      (rec.gambling.lottery)
    • Re: GETTING WORSE AGAIN.
      ... Get another server John. ... >tickets sold are evenly distributed. ... >distribution, but you think, even more ridiculously, that there's ... >> Lottery experts? ...
      (rec.gambling.lottery)
    • Re: Path Not Found for a Service
      ... John D. wrote: ... > I'm getting an error that a service fails to start because it cannot ... You could export the whole key as a reg file for backup first. ... Note also that I usually recommend stopping & disabling the license logging ...
      (microsoft.public.win2000.file_system)

    Loading