> OTOH, having exclusive copyright means you can more successfully defend that > copyright. If someone took a copy of the linux kernel and used it in a > blatently non-GPL compliant way, who could sue?
At least one opinion is that everyone whose code is used would be entitled to sue the offender if they shipped a full GPL kernel. Think "class action" When people start linking with fragments of the kernel and the like it gets much more complicated, and depends upon whom. On the bright side nowdays people you may have on the copyright enforcing side of a kernel dispute include IBM, HP, Compaq, AMI, LSI, Cirrus Logic, AMD, Intel, .... none of whom I suspect would ever have signed copyrights over to the FSF. > Since I don't think anyone has registered the copyright for the kernel > no-one would be eligable for statutory damages and actual damages is zero. This is not neccessary in most civilised countries, and in fact the current US policy seems very suspect when compared to current WIPO treaties. Things like the DMCA also changed the rules a little. Alan _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
