Another polemic around Ubuntu

[Alberto Salvia Novella]

Michael Hall:
 > Linus himself has said that some things that depend on the kernel
 > aren't derived works of the kernel, such as the Andrew File System,
 > and did not have to be released under the GPL.

That logic is correct:

Richard Stallman (https://goo.gl/9YYpel):
 > The copyright holders of Linux can give permission to use Linux in
 > ways not authorized by GPL version 2.

Linus Torvalds (http://goo.gl/q8zyAb):
 > At least under US copyright law, and at least if you see Linux as a
 > "collective work", I am actually the sole owner of copyright in the
 > collective work of the Linux kernel.

Linus Torvalds (http://goo.gl/NcOmv0):
 > One gray area in particular is something like a driver that was
 > originally written for another operating system (ie clearly not a
 > derived work of Linux in origin).
 >
 > That is the area where I personally believe that some modules may be
 > considered to not be derived works simply because they weren't
 > designed for Linux and don't depend on any special Linux behaviour.

So Linus is implicitly giving permission to use the ZFS module, in his 
right of doing so.

One can argue that is something bad to do, but from that moment it 
becomes a matter of personal choice and invalidates the arguments of the 
Software Freedom Conservancy.

Many thanks for the clarification 👍


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6472 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-community-team/attachments/20160603/ba8318f2/attachment-0001.bin>