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

[Nic James Ferrier]

"Andrew Guard" <andrew at andrewguard.com> writes:

>> 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

And you only have to:

  find /usr/src/linux-source-2.6 -name "*.c" | xargs -l1 grep -i SUSE

to see a whole bunch of SUSE corps (C).

-- 
Nic Ferrier
http://www.tapsellferrier.co.uk   for all your tapsell ferrier needs