On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 04:53:24PM -0600, John Galt wrote: > On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, David Starner wrote: > >A patch to a program is a derivative work of the program, in most cases. > >Hence, you need permission of the copyright owner to distribute it; > >lacking direct permission (rather painful for the kernel), you have to > >distribute it under the GPL if you distribute it. > > Only assuming that you distribute the patched kernel as a unit. It is > entirely feasable to distribute the patches as a separately copyrightable > entity.
Not by my understanding. A patch will include generally include pieces of the kernel source, and only make sense in the context of the kernel. That makes it a derivative work of the kernel. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It's not a habit; it's cool; I feel alive. If you don't have it you're on the other side." - K's Choice (probably referring to the Internet) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]