"Licensed" codecs

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 11:09, Pavel Rosenboim wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> 
> >>>Consult a lawyer. The definition of 'derivative' is complicated to say the least. 
> >>>For actual GPL code the GPL itself deliberately takes a "free nor not at all"
> >>>approach.
> >>
> >>There exist non-GPLd kernel modules, though (NVIDIA drivers,etc...). Do
> >>you want to say that they are illegal?
> > 
> > 
> > As I said consult a lawyer. A body of people including the FSF certainly
> > believe they are.
> > 
> 
> Well, if we define 'derivative' in SCO way, then plugins and kernel
> modules must be GPLd :)

In that case, SCO derived it from the FSF as they have been the ones who
have been harping on this for years.


-- 
Stephen John Smoogen		smoogen at lanl.gov
Los Alamos National Labrador  CCN-5 Sched 5/40  PH: 4-0645 (note new #)
Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S  Los Alamos, NM 87545
-- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --