[License-review] For approval: The Cryptographic Autonomy License (Beta 4)

[Bruce Perens]

On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 11:22 AM Pamela Chestek <pamela at chesteklegal.com>
wrote:

> Isn't it more similar to the outcome if the Linux kernel hadn't clarified
> that what is in user space didn't need to be under the GPL? If the Linux
> kernel was under the CAL, wouldn't all the applications that run on it also
> have to be under open source licenses, unless the licensor had the Combined
> Works exception?
>

This is not a particularly good example, because the kernel provides an
interface that is clearly intended to provide services to separate
programs. Sort of like the plug in Goloob v. Nintendo. In addition the API
was defined in industry standards, and thus it was clear that the Linux
developers could not own a copyright to those portions of the API.
-- 
Bruce Perens - Partner, OSS.Capital.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20191227/02e1e2e1/attachment.html>