RE:Re: Why is Nvidia given GPL'd code to use in closed source drivers?

From: Rik van Riel (admin@dsbl.org)
Date: Thu Jan 02 2003 - 16:42:38 EST


On Thu, 2 Jan 2003 Hell.Surfers@cwctv.net wrote:

> "or later" perhaps copyright could be defined, and headers added to
> derivative?

Luckily copyright holders cannot define the scope of copyright
law. This doesn't just include the (often illegal) EULAs of
proprietary software companies, but also the very strict
interpretation "some people" have of the GPL.

Both proprietary EULAs and the GPL have to work within the law
and cannot add anything illegal under the law.

Rik

-- 
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/		http://guru.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap:  <a href=mailto:"october@surriel.com">october@surriel.com</a>
-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 22:00:18 EST