... end user links the module into the kernel, creating a work that can't be legally distributedIt's rather similar to the arguments Napster tried to use,
Actually, it's simpler than that. Although I've never seen how it fits into copyright law, US copyright law gives the author the right to control "preparation of derivative works." Even if you prepare it just for your own use, apparently. Stallman thought that was one of the greater threats against software freedom. I remember the argument being used against a person who was editing people's personal copies of Titanic video tapes to remove the R rated content (but I don't know if it succeeded).
But I'm surprised that Moglen believes everyone agrees that GPL doesn't permit linking non-GPL modules dynamically. From reading LWN, I believe it's a well established fact that there's disagreement on that.
Of course, we don't actually know Moglen believes that. We just know that he said he does. At least one other place in the interview, he uses rhetoric over clarity. He says he didn't say anything about SCO's reasons for leaving GNU alone, then makes it clear in the next sentence, using the word "because" instead of "reason," that he did.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds