On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:29:53AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
It is the _distribution_ of a collective whole based on both
and kernel together, which makes the difference under the GPL.
Are you claiming they are a database. I don't understand your "collective
here. What sort of a work do you claim it is, and why does the collective work
acquire some kind of extra rights ?
I believe that if we follow your logic, we should also be able to
distribute GPL'd code linked against proprietary libraries. Yes, we've
combined them together into one executable -- but evidently we can call
it "merely aggregation" and get away with anything. There's a general
interface between the independent parts, which you seem to believe
excuses the combination, yes?
In some cases the answer is probably yes, not because the GPL likes the idea
but because the rights in copyright probably don't extend to that.
We should be able to distribute binary-only drivers actually linked
the kernel too. If we accept that they are independent works in the
first place??, then 'merely aggregating' them into the vmlinux should be
That rather depends upon whether they are derivative which is an area that
seems ot have little clarity and no computing caselaw.