On 7 Jun 2000, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> >>>>> "JS" == James Sutherland <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> JS> If the kernel I'm using drops off the face of the earth, but I
> JS> continue distributing it, I need to provide the sources myself;
> JS> providing a (working!) URL to the source I used should be
> JS> adequate, though? If the URL I'm using disappears, I need to
> JS> find/create another one, of course, but that shouldn't happen...
> Ok, take a look at the actual license. Any Linux system should contain
> lots of copies of it.
I have done.
> Abit clearly did not do that.
> As far as I know no such offer was given.
> "Only for noncommercial distribution". What Abit is doing is not
> This means that even if Abit distributed binaries compiled from
> completely unmodified sources, or even distributed binaries copied
> verbatim from say RedHat, they would still be in violation of the
I'm not talking about Abit specifically, my point is that the GPL is
excessively restrictive. For example, it prevents me from distributing a
pre-built emergency repair disk; WTF does this achieve??
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:29 EST