On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 05:32, Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > Also, a clustering file system built to work on top of this file > > system shall be considered a derivative work for the purposes of > > interpreting the GPL license granted herein. Plugins are also to be > > considered derivative works. Share code or pay money, we give you the > > choice. > > Surely a license cannot add anything to the set of derived works (if > the other work is not derived, the license obviously doesn't apply to > it and hence never gets to say it is derived; if it is, it is even > without the license saying so). However I believe -legal has not > considered text like this a problem before (I might be wrong though). It doesn't "add", it clarifies. i.e. if you build a clustered file system that does stuff specific to reiserfs (e.g. use the reiser4 syscall), then that will be considered a derived work, and must be distributable under the GPL. Sure, you could go to court and argue that it isn't - but namesys have a clear clarification of what they consider, so I hope your lawyer is good :) Think of it in the same light as the clarification in the kernel's copy of the GPL saying that userspace programs aren't derived. except here it's the other way around. -- Stewart Smith (stewart@flamingspork.com) http://www.flamingspork.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part