From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760398AbYBGQbZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:31:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757997AbYBGQbM (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:31:12 -0500 Received: from hawking.rebel.net.au ([203.20.69.83]:34939 "EHLO hawking.rebel.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752643AbYBGQbK (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:31:10 -0500 Message-ID: <47AB324C.5070002@davidnewall.com> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:01:08 +1030 From: David Newall User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: Adrian Bunk , Chris Friesen , Greg KH , Christer Weinigel , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: mark USB drivers as being GPL only References: <20080125180232.GA4613@kroah.com> <20080202123710.42df1aa0@weinigel.se> <20080202191930.GA19826@kroah.com> <20080203124849.0226560f@weinigel.se> <84144f020802030635h3a9c4304n943d117e936f1c2d@mail.gmail.com> <47A5F418.6030104@weinigel.se> <20080203231530.GB15692@kroah.com> <47A8F27F.3060504@nortel.com> <20080206210452.GB7198@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> <47AB06F9.30201@davidnewall.com> <20080207141557.5fcf3b2d@core> <47AB1D91.6090609@davidnewall.com> <20080207150720.2ac6d2c4@core> In-Reply-To: <20080207150720.2ac6d2c4@core> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: >> previous statements which seemed to say, "you've spoken to numerous >> > > Please don't use "seemed to say" and then quote words I've never said. > That's misleading, rude and also awful language style. No, it's called, "paraphrasing," and it's quite normal in a conversation. You say something, I tell you what I think you said, you refine your language, and the process continues until we're happy that a semantic consensus has been reached. In that spirit, should I now understand that what you meant is that *you* *think* that kernel modules must be released under GPL. Should I accept that you didn't mean that numerous lawyers had told you that this was factually so? Of course, this begs the question of why there would be a MODULE_LICENSE("proprietary"). You may hold beliefs as understood above, but it seems guaranteed that the opinions of those who count are divided.