Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers

[Joshua Simmons]

> I quote from Stallman: "Nobody is trying to patent specific programs; that
> isn't allowed, but nobody would bother even if it was allowed. A patent
> covering one specific program would not really matter to anyone. The reason
> why these patents create an issue is that they're not about specific
> programs, they're much more general. Each of these patents covers an idea
> that you might use in implementing various different programs, that lots of
> different programmers might use, might put into the programs that they are
> writing. And that's what makes them obstacles and dangers to software
> development activity."

What are you talking about?  This is not about software patents AT ALL.
Not one person is claiming they have a patent on whatever it is that
V J's company is putting out (especially since we have no idea what
that might be).  Patents != copyright.


Software patents: This super cool red button idea is mine.  If you make
a red button, you have to give me money.

Copyright: This code is mine.  You can't copy my code without my permission.

GPL: You can copy my code all you want, BUT if you add on to it and give out
the results, you have to give out your code too!

Your argument might have some sort of merit, but I gave up trying to work
through it.  Stop confusing patents and copyright and try again.

Joshua Simmons
-
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/