Re: non-free firmware in kernel modules, aggregation and unclear copyright notice.
David Schwartz wrote:
Wrong, sorry. Copyright is a *monopoly* on some activities (copy,
distribution of copies, making *and* distribution of derivative works).
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 08:07:03PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
>> The way you stop someone from distributing part of your work is
>> by arguing that the work they are distributing is a derivative
>> work of your work and they had no right to *make* it in the first
>> place. See, for example, Mulcahy v. Cheetah Learning.
> Er, that's one way, but not *the* way. I could grant you
> permission to create derivatives of my work, but not to
> redistribute them. To stop you from distributing them, I'd argue
> that you had no right to distribute them--you *did* have the right
> to make it in the first place.
You could do that be means of a contract, but I don't think you could
it do by means of a copyright license. The problem is that there is
no right to control the distribution of derivative works for you to
withhold from me.