Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license (-> possible GPL violation :)

Jan-Benedict Glaw
2004-04-27T13:13:04Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 922 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-04-27 13:59:48 +0100, Paulo Marques <pmarques@grupopie.com>
wrote in message <408E5944.8090807@grupopie.com>:
> Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> >This way, the module format doesn't change, but we can do additional
> >verification in the loader.
>
> The way I see it, they know a C string ends with a '\0'. This is like
> saying that a English sentence ends with a dot. If they wrote "GPL\0" they
> are effectively saying that the license *is* GPL period.
>
> So, where the source code? :)

That's another (quite amusing:) point of view. Anybody willing to ask a
lawyer?

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak!
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]