From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Dec 17 0:27:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from monorchid.lemis.com (monorchid.lemis.com [192.109.197.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0312837B419; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 00:27:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by monorchid.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id C8279786E4; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:57:38 +1030 (CST) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:57:38 +1030 From: Greg Lehey To: Brett Glass Cc: Terry Lambert , "Gary W. Swearingen" , hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org, "Brandon D. Valentine" , Hiten Pandya , chat@FreeBSD.org, phk@FreeBSD.org, Poul-Henning Kamp Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <20011217185738.N14500@monorchid.lemis.com> References: <20011213051012.Y56723-100000@turtle.looksharp.net> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <3C1875D6.5DE4F996@mindspring.com> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <20011214122837.O3448@monorchid.lemis.com> <3C19807D.C441F084@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011214175450.02da2a90@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011215232233.00e74cc0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011216221810.031b6820@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217001345.00e26280@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20011217001345.00e26280@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i Organization: The FreeBSD Project Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF 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 On Monday, 17 December 2001 at 0:17:42 -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > At 11:04 PM 12/16/2001, Greg Lehey wrote: > >>> If they're part of the kernel, they're not separate works. RMS would >>> have the right to demand, TODAY, that the entire FreeBSD kernel be >>> licensed under the GPL. This is the danger of permitting the camel's >>> nose into the tent. >> >> Well, why don't we ask him? > > Go ahead. He'll wring his hands with glee, seeing that carelessness > and apathy have delivered his enemies into his hands. Where did you see that in his reply? >> I interpret this to mean "after linking". It would appear to be the >> kernel binary which falls under the GPL. About the only obligation of >> the FreeBSD project would be to make the corresponding source code >> available. > > Not true. The FreeBSD Project would be obliged to license the entire > kernel -- source and binary -- under the GPL. That is a complete and utter contradiction of what Stallman said. I see that you carefully removed his words: > The kernel code released under the revised BSD license will continue > to be under the revised BSD license; it is only the *combination as > a whole* that will be covered by the GPL--if and when the > GPL-covered code is included in it. If someone links a kernel > without that GPL-covered code, the GPL won't apply to that kernel. Would you please explain: 1. How you got to your contradictory conclusion above. 2. Why you omitted this statement from the reply. >> This sounds to me like a technicality. For me, the main thing is that >> the FreeBSD code remains under the BSD license, and it seems that >> there's no issue there. > > There is a very serious issue. It contains GPLed code and has been > distributed. This means that if the GPL is legally enforceable, > every version of FreeBSD that has contained that code must be > licensed under the GPL. Brett, you're arguing against facts. How do you want people to take you seriously? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message