RE: GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox + code
From: David Schwartz
Date: Mon Nov 08 2004 - 16:10:08 EST
> if that's the case, isn't it necessary to distribute the proprietary
> parts separately (or vice-versa)? else those proprietary parts would
> also be under the GPL.
It depends what you mean by speparately. RedHat ships CDs that contain both
GPL'd and non-GPL'd packages. They're even tweaked to work together. It
comes down to whether the the thing they're shipping is a single work or a
collection of works, and to what extent you can draw the line between them.
I don't know enough about sveasoft's packaging to say.
However, one thing is clear. If they actually modify source files that
started out as GPL'd works, and then ship the executables, they are
definitely shipping a single work that is a derivative of the GPL'd work.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/