| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Practical vs. PossiblePractical vs. PossiblePosted Oct 14, 2003 20:38 UTC (Tue) by ncm (subscriber, #165)In reply to: Practical vs. Possible by rknop Parent article: LinkSys and binary modules If it's in a header file, it's probably published. Even if it's not in header file, the source is published. No matter what the FSF says, a judge is likely to decide that if you physically can plug into it without "circumventing" anybody's encryption, then you're allowed to. Of course, the more of that you do, the more fragile your module becomes. None of these fine points apply to Linksys, of course. They can't just ship the module, they have to ship the kernel, too, or they don't have a router to sell. That puts them squarely under my second alternative, above, shipping what is unambiguously a derived work.
(Log in to post comments)
Practical vs. Possible Posted Oct 14, 2003 20:55 UTC (Tue) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link] I don't think copyright's concept of derivative works have anything to dowith encyption. The only part of copyright that does is the DMCA and we aren't talking about that here, at least I hope not :)
|
|
||||||||||||