From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 01:24:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 01:24:07 -0500 Received: from mx5.mail.ru ([194.67.57.15]:14348 "EHLO mx5.mail.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 01:24:06 -0500 From: "Samium Gromoff" <_deepfire@mail.ru> To: quack@bigpond.net.au Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: spinlocks, the GPL, and binary-only modules Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: mPOP Web-Mail 2.19 X-Originating-IP: 194.226.0.89 via proxy [194.226.0.63] Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:31:08 +0300 Reply-To: "Samium Gromoff" <_deepfire@mail.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > When you GPL a piece of software, you sign over your rights to the FSF. > Therefore, there is very little that can be done about this; > from a legal perspective, the FSF _itself > determines what is and what isn't construed as a derived work. Microsoft would _love_ the world to think that GPL is like that. I`m sorry this is a plain FUD. --- cheers, Samium Gromoff _____________________________________