Re: Bug#239952: kernel-source-2.6.4: qla2xxx contains non-free
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> if you did [write the program], then you have to give us
> the stuff you were working with.
The author doesn't _have_ to give us anything.
If you mean that the author has to give us the stuff that he
was working with if we are to be allowed to distribute what he
has licensed to us then I think you are attributing to the
author the intention of taking away in the fine print what he
appears to give us in the large print. Perhaps it is right to
be extremely careful. The copyright to the work could fall into
the hands of someone hostile who would try to exploit the
ambiguity of the license. Explicit clarification would be better.
On the other hand I can't help thinking of the following analogy.
A: Need my car? Here are my keys.
B: I presume you refer to vehicle VID#3243-343478430-AJ59.
May I also insert the keys into the ignition, turn the
key and thereby cause the car to operate? And may I
also enter the car and cause it to move toward my
destination, i.e., "drive" the car? Just to be clear.
A: >grumble<
B: Well, I guess I'll have to walk, then.
--
Thomas Hood
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
Reply to: