2008/6/2 Gora Mohanty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I will > reiterate that a GPL violation is a very serious matter, and > one in which the FSF, and people like Eben Moglen would be > very interested. Could someone please demonstrate that such > has happened?
FSF and/or Eben can act only in cases where the violation has happened with code that FSF owns copyright. You cannot enforce copyright violations of other people's code. > Erm, the FSF for one is very militant about such things, and rightly > so. > gpl-violations.org has been enforcing GPL on violations of Linux, the kernel. > There have been endless arguments about binary drivers on lkml, and > frankly, I am not personally interested enough to try and follow the > details. However, from what I remember, the consensus was that it was > possible to have binary drivers without violating the GPLv2. Again, the > GPLv3 explicitly tries to block such loopholes. The violation does not comes with releasing binary drivers separately (working aoround GPL requirement I believe), it comes into picture when you distribute it is a combined work. Cheers Praveen -- പ്രവീണ് അരിമ്പ്രത്തൊടിയില് <GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call! <DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) Join The DRM Elimination Crew Now! http://fci.wikia.com/wiki/Anti-DRM-Campaign _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [email protected] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Next Event: http://freed.in - February 22-24, 2008 Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
