Re: Moglen's "all good faith"
Alexander Terekhov said on Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 02:33:08AM +0100,:
> On 1/20/06, Andrew Donnellan <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > GNU GPL'd. And, BTW, how come that the FSF's "compliance lab" didn't
> > > purify the kernel of *GNU*/Linux?
> > Because FSF doesn't own any copyrights in Linux - it doesn't contribute.
> <quote author=Moglen>
> The Foundation notes that despite the alarmist statements SCO's
> employees have made, the Foundation has not been sued, nor has
> SCO, despite our requests, identified any work whose copyright the
> Foundation holds-including all of IBM's modifications to the kernel
> for use with IBM's S/390 mainframe computers, assigned to the
> Foundation by IBM--that SCO asserts infringes its rights in any
> So how come that the FSF's "compliance lab" didn't purify the
> kernel of *GNU*/Linux for IBM mainframes at least?
1. That still does not make FSF the owner of the whole linux kernel;
only those parts which have been assigned to the FSF are owned by
2. The linux is not a GNU project and that is why we call it the linux
kernel; and the GNU/Linux operating system, else we would have been
calling it GNU Linux; (like GNU Bash and GNU readline and whatever)
3. FSF's ownership of parts of the kernel means FSF is one of the
copyright holders in the collective work called the linux kernel.
BTW, if you have problems with statements made by Eben Moglen, you
might be better off clarifying things with him direct rather than on
Mahesh T. Pai