On Mer, 2004-09-22 at 06:09, Eric Anholt wrote: > lines are GPLed of a file otherwise MIT-licensed). I was very bothered > by Jon's suggestion that a lot of the code could be GPLed by accident or > something, as if that license would have infected the entire DRM > (including shared bits) while nobody was looking. If someone feels that > there is GPLed code in there, it should be looked into and documented > immediately, or that vague stick should stop being waved.
The GPL is intentionally very explicit about this situation "These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. " ["the Program" being the GPL code] ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
