From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756864AbXIBTF0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 15:05:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751345AbXIBTFP (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 15:05:15 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-05.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.44]:57525 "EHLO ms-smtp-05.texas.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750947AbXIBTFO (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 15:05:14 -0400 Message-ID: <46DB0960.9060405@austin.rr.com> Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 14:05:04 -0500 From: "Jonathan A. George" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (X11/20070824) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Jacob CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: "GPL weasels and the atheros stink" References: <46DAF70E.9060800@austin.rr.com> <7579f7fb0709021131g43768bcet5a0895b5e56540ef@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7579f7fb0709021131g43768bcet5a0895b5e56540ef@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Question #1: Is it _ethical_ (legality aside) to take someone else's >> actively maintained work (for example an OpenBSD driver) and make >> changes which can not be shared/used by the original developer/maintainer? >> >> Answer #1: Considering that the whole reason I personally choose the GPL >> for some projects is to prevent this sort of one way street behavior >> _away_ from the original OSS developers/contributors _my_ answer must >> be; No it is not ethical. > > I beg to differ. If you want to put things out there for others to use > but want to avoid having the situation as you describe it, simply > license the work as such (which would be neither BSD nor GPL)- > requiring any changes to come back to the original maintainer. > *Snort*. I seem to recall Unix commercial distributions that made > claims that bug fixes that you made belonged to them. ... But is it _ethical_ (as opposed to legal) to violate the expressed intent of the original author ... IP laws (including copyright) are generally used as an imperfect (and internationally inconsistent) mechanism to protect intent, but inexact application of those laws affects enforcement as law ... however, respect for intent remains the ethical standard by which I (for one) would prefer to govern my life. --Jonathan--