Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-15T19:30:27Z

On Jun 15, 2007, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:

> On Thursday 14 June 2007 22:25:57 Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 2007, Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Alexandre Oliva (aoliva@redhat.com) said:
>> >> And since the specific implementation involves creating a derived work
>> >> of the GPLed kernel (the signature, or the signed image, or what have
>> >> you)
>> >
>> > Wait, a signed filesystem image that happens to contain GPL code
>> > is now a derived work? Under what sort of interpretation does *that*
>> > occur?
>>
>> Is the signature not derived from the bits in the GPLed component, as
>> much as it is derived from the key?

> Actually, you can't copyright, trademark, or patent a number.

Agreed. And this counter-argument of yours is a distraction.

I was careful to not talk about "derived work". Please read it again
under this clarification (that I'm pretty sure I'd already made
before, but it's getting hard to keep track of everything in this
thread ;-)

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}