At Least One Error in the White Paper

Story: Linux Users May Be Breaking U.S. Securities LawsTotal Replies: 2
Author Content

Jan 18, 2006
2:24 PM EST
After quoting para 2.b of the GPLv2, the white paper claims: "Now, "Distribution" includes embedding software in a device that is sold. So, if you modify the Linux kernel for your project, you must release the code to open source. So, the license simply says:

Change the code = Share the code

So, whether the GPL matters depends on whether you're changing the code. And that depends on your business application. For example, if you are running Linux on your server, you're almost certainly not changing the Linux code, so the GPL's provisions do not apply. On the other hand, if you are embedding Linux in a device, you probably are changing the Linux code, and adding new code, and so the GPL does apply.

The truth is, as long as you do not redistribute the code you can modify it all day long. You are not required to redistribute your modified code at all. If you do, you must also release the source. at least they did put modifying and redistribution together in the next sentence. Still, this part is pure crap.


The fact that I am running GNU/Linux on my server doesn't mean I am not changing the source. What kind of stupid logic is that? I haven't finished reading this paper yet. I took a break to post this. Anyone else find some other good examples of illogical findings?

Jan 19, 2006
12:31 AM EST
I've had a look at the whitepaper, as well. It is full of misconceptions, false assumptions, wrong conclusions and sometimes even blank lies. The most funny sentence was "With BSD, they user stays free"

According to that, a user of macosx would be more free than a user of GNU/Linux. What a joke.

Jan 19, 2006
11:38 AM EST
I saw that too, and agree wholeheartedly!

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!