Re: License go no go?

From: Dragan Stancevic (visitorat_private)
Date: Sat Oct 26 2002 - 14:08:09 PDT

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: License go no go?"

    On Friday 25 October 2002 23:38, Greg KH wrote:
    > There are also a number of Linux programmers, with copyrights on either
    > the security.h file, or the code where the LSM hooks that have publicly
    > stated that they would sue any makers of proprietary LSM modules.
    
    Well what about the instance of writing your own headers? I've been working 
    with driving hardware mostly so I am thinking of an example where a specific 
    piece of hardware stores a specific structure in memory:
    struct {
    	u32 cmd;
    	u32 status;
    };
    
    Would that make l-k programmers liable because drivers for windows existed 
    first? As it was explained to me by a lawyer things that can be done only one 
    way are not considered derived or infringedupon. It falls under a separate 
    category.
    
    Just that I make my self clear. I am not really asking for a legal advice, I 
    don't think any of us here are IP lawyers. What I am trying to understand is 
    what people _think_ about certain aspects of this issue.
    
    Thanks.
    
    -- 
    Peace can only come as a natural consequence
    of universal enlightenment. -Dr. Nikola Tesla
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Oct 26 2002 - 14:12:24 PDT