Re: RTLinux patent
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 02:09:09PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> The modifications would probably be so great that you'd have a
> copyrightable work in and of itself.
I'm not convinced, yet.
> However, as Marcus has pointed out, the algorithms are the sticky
> issue and that would be enough to consign it to non-free if it was
> distributable at all--Debian-bsd seems to be back from the dead,
> and the *BSD kernel (which one to start with is still a matter of
> contention) is most definitely NOT GPL :)
Of course, this only is significant for third world countries (e.g. the
u.s.a., maybe) which allow patents on such architectural issues.
> AFACT, the rule of thumb is that if it's not distributable with any
> part of Debian, it's not distributable by Debian PERIOD, which is the
> way IMHO it should be.
I presume here you're talking about copyright -- we have linux specific
binaries which don't work under hurd, for example -- you just plain
can't distribute working hurd versions because they don't exist. Also,
we have non-us software which for patent reasons isn't distributable
for systems which exist in the u.s.
> So I'm going to weasel out of your question by saying that it's
> irrelevant in this case :)
Ok, but I'm going to weasel you right back -- guard your socks.
--
Raul
Reply to: