Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

[Derek Fawcus]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 05:54:50PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> > So copies to disk and RAM that are "an essential step in the utilization of 
> > the computer program" are non-infringing.
> 
> probably true for the US, most definitely not true in europe... it's
> explicit in law here that copying from disk-to-ram and ram-to-cpu is
> distributing in the "need a license" sense...

Wrong  (assuming you want to include the UK as part of Europe :-)

UK Copyright Designs and Patent Act,  1988 (as ammended)

50C.--(1)  It  is not an infringement of copyright for a lawful user of
           a copy of a computer program to copy or adapt it,  provided
           that the copying or adapting-
   
   (a) is necessary for his lawful use; and
   (b) is  not  prohibited under any term or condition of an agreement
       regulating the circumstances in which his use is lawful

   (2)  It  may, in particular, be necessary for the lawful use of a
        computer program to copy it or adapt it for the purpose of
        correcting errors in it.

... and the above is from a copyright regime which is in general quite
draconian.

OK - So now you get to argue about EULAs,  but that's a seperate issue.

DF
-
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/