| 1 |
On 08/18/2015 09:54 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I think the kernel devs would be hard-pressed to mount some kind of |
| 4 |
> GPL infringement lawsuit. In general US courts have tended to block |
| 5 |
> attempts to use copyright/trademark/patents/etc simply to prevent |
| 6 |
> interoperability, and that is basically what this is. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The entire point of the GPL is to "prevent interoperability" with people |
| 9 |
who want to steal your work and take away its users' freedoms. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> And would we really want it any other way? How is this not like |
| 13 |
> Brother sticking chips in their ink cartridges containing copyrighted |
| 14 |
> code, or the chip in lightning cables? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
They are similar. The original GPL was a legal hack: to take copyright |
| 17 |
and use it in a novel way, granting freedoms rather than restricting |
| 18 |
them. Which coincidentally is how your example differs from |
| 19 |
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL =) |
Archives