Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause?

[Andre Hedrick]

Pavel,

So basically you think it is okay to pollute the kernel tree and
opensource with information of questionable origin?  If this is your
position, remind me to remove all code that you have ever touched.

You do not get a lawsuit if you have ownership of the code you are
submitting.  Why should you worry if ethics of good code and content is
never in question.

I am do not mean to smudge you but you own word (if I understand them) do
it for you.  Plese correct if I misread.

Cheers,

Andre Hedrick
LAD Storage Consulting Group

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> > OSL 1 and 2 are a preferred choice as they are slowly creaping into the
> > kernel.  The beauty and pain of OSL is that SCO would be a NOOP.  The
> > requirement imposed on the contributing author to indemnify (sp really
> > bad) the changes/patches to the codebase core, makes it a better world.
> > In short code sets of questionable origin are the liabities of the author
> > and not the community.
> 
> Hmm, remind me to never ever touch anything under OSL. Copyright is
> different in different countries and having $1e9 lawsuit going after
> _me_ just because U.S. laws are crazy does not seem funny to me.
> 
> 								Pavel
> -- 
> When do you have a heart between your knees?
> [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
> 

-
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/