[Sussex] Some more thoughts on the Microsoft/Novel deal

[Andrew Guard]

> Interesting discussion, was hoping something like this may get discussed
> at
> some point, just so I can understand it better myself (often get in a
> muddle
> with gpl).
>
> My understanding would be though that the kernel would not contain any
> copyrighted suse code ? (even if they have worked on it, the bits they did
> would be under the gpl, which is different to their proprietary code with
> their distro release, haven't they effectively given up any copyright ?).

GPL is nothing about giving up copyright.  In fact without Copyright ie
Public Domain the GPL would be unenforceable.  When it Public Domain you
can do as you please and doesn't matter what anyone says about it because
it in the Public Domain.  Now Public Domain is rather interesting because
if it in Public Domain you tomorrow could claim you own the copyright and
do as you please.  If want to release your works in Public Domain then
there is the MIT licence.  It not a licence as such but notice that it be
release in to the Public Domain.


Anyway I think you should read what says at this site:-
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING


-- 
This e-mail has been edited with a webmail service.