Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick

[Jon Masters]

Alan wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 21:47:36 +0100 (MET)
> Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 3 2007 10:31, David Schwartz wrote:
> > > The way out of the GPL problem is to make clear that it is *not* a 
> > > copyright enforcement scheme
> > So why do we have EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL then, if
>
> Because if you go around modifying code to get around it then regardless
> of the DMCA question you are actively doing it and there is very clear
> intent to do other than the right holder intended. In some ways its the
> difference between walking through an open archway into a private area
> and kicking the door down to get in.

It's a sign, a notice, and the reason I brought up this discussion is 
precisely because I don't think the kernel has any business being an 
enforcement mechanism - that's not what the spirit of our community is 
really about, we're about openness (as much as is possible).

If I go into an airport, open my laptop and connect to a network called 
"Free WiFi network", then I might have a good case to argue that I 
expected the WiFi to be free. If I connect to a network called "Not 
Free, Don't Use" then...I think the intent of the wording is clear.

Anyway. Are we doing this or not - the more I think about it, the more 
I'm kinda "happy" to just leave things as they are. Yes, bad people will 
continuing doing bad things no matter what we do. Do we really want to 
change stuff just to work around obvious abuse? Alan?

Jon.
-
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/