LWN.net Logo

Notwithstanding

Notwithstanding

Posted Nov 10, 2005 8:22 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341)
In reply to: Notwithstanding by ncm
Parent article: Debian and Nexenta collide

Strangely enough, I did look it up to make sure it meant what I've always thought it meant and (AFAICT) it does. Care to expand?


(Log in to post comments)

Notwithstanding

Posted Nov 10, 2005 16:44 UTC (Thu) by vmole (subscriber, #111) [Link]

It means that 2.1(d) completely overrides (or perhaps "limits") subsection 2.1(b). That means that the patent grants do NOT apply to any modified code, or code that incorporates CDDL code in new ways. That may not be the intent, but that's what it says.

Notwithstanding

Posted Nov 10, 2005 23:03 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Interesting, that goes against completely against the sense of "Notwithstanding" that I've understood. The "notwithstanding" refers to some obstacle that may limit or make more difficult the effect/action being referred to. I had thought till now at least.

Notwithstanding

Posted Nov 10, 2005 16:50 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link]

A simpler version: No matter (and despite) what 2.1b says, 2.1d applies.

Copyright © 2008, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds