"Derivative Work" for Software Defined

[Ken Arromdee]

On 8 Jan 2003, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> But, again, it's not unclear for Linux.  Linus has clearly stated that
> loadable binary modules are OK for Linux.  There is no confusion
> there.

But Linus doesn't own the copyright of all of the code in Linux.  If this
is just a personal exemption granted by Linus and isn't based on a legal
definition of "derivative work", it wouldn't apply to the whole thing, just
to the parts that he himself wrote.  I don't think a kernel containing only
the parts Linus owns personally would be much use.

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3