From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Dec 20 16:44:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 483A237B417 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:44:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92469C541; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:44:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA04510; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:44:42 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBL0jDi66542; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:45:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Terry Lambert Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GPL nonsense: time to stop References: <20011218121011.E21649@monorchid.lemis.com> <4hzo4hyv3c.o4h@localhost.localdomain> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217221801.02841bc0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011218102351.02841f00@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011218124204.02812700@localhost> <3C1FA272.D9679E44@mindspring.com> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 20 Dec 2001 16:45:12 -0800 In-Reply-To: <3C1FA272.D9679E44@mindspring.com> Message-ID: Lines: 21 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert writes: > Actually, no it is not. It is in an FS directory or index file entry, > and an index of this sort is subject to compilation copyright only. I think there's no practical differance between a compilation copyright and a derivative one, except to the extent that the GPL licensor will consider it to pass the "mere aggregation" clause. Is that what you refer to? Or do you mean that it is a compilation which is not creative enough to be considered a work of authorship deserving of copyrights. > I think the worst you could argue is that a product based on a > requirement for the GPL'ed driver/module in order to function > would either not be legally redistributable and/or would not be > legally licensed. > > The way around that for something like a set top box, of course, > would be to simply license the use of the box, rather than > selling it or the code. You're still copying or distributing it. AFAIK, nothing else matters. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message