2008/5/10 Markus Laire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Fri, 09 May 2008 16:32:19 -0300 > Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On May 9, 2008, Markus Laire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Several files in Linux Kernel have been changed in gNS without >> > including such a notice (as one example: sound/pci/Makefile) which >> > seems to be clear violation of GPLv2. >> >> > Also, according to section 4 of GPLv2, such violation would >> > automatically terminate the rights under the GPLv2. >> >> Even though this strict interpretation may be correct, I don't think >> it's black and white like that. > >> First of all, there's a question on >> whether the changes at hand are copyrightable in the first place. > > I don't think that question is relevant here. If you modify files, you > need to acknowledge that fact so that everyone knows that they are > getting modified version, even if the changes are non-copyrightable.
Are the actual files copyrightable? What is deemed to be original in the makefiles, for instance? /$ _______________________________________________ gNewSense-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users
