Fedora Freedom and linux-libre

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jun  9, 2008, Alan Cox <alan at redhat.com> wrote:

> the tg3 file may be available on its own from your own tree.

So, before gNewSense cleaned up the kernel in a way that ended up
being called linux-libre, it didn't exist as a separate work to be
aggregated into other works and result in linux-2.6.25.tar.bz2?

And then, since it clearly wasn't the case that these works released
under the name linux-libre were combined with a bunch of firmwares to
form the non-libre linux releases (there's a causal loop in there
somewhere), how does the fact that it's accidentally available from my
own tree matter?  That's not how copyright works, and you know that.

>> > and also on the boundaries of contract created by copyright.
>> 
>> ?!?!?  Copyright does not create contracts.  Copyright creates

> Bingo.. and copyright does not give you power over other works

Nobody's talking about power over other unrelated works.  We're
talking about derivative works formed by combining together multiple
works.  There's no doubt that copyright does give the holder power
over this case.  The only possible doubt is whether the combination
forms a copyrightable work.

> I do not need your permission to put your book on the same bookcase
> as someone elses book.

The result is clearly not a copyrightable work.

> Nor do you have any standing to impose restrictions relating
> to other works via copyright.

True, but this is a distraction.  Nobody's restricting other works.
The issue the debate was turned into is whether the GPLed work can be
distributed in this way.  The more people insist 'taking it out will
break', the weaker the 'mere aggregation' defense becomes.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}