From 39584e54f90210350013a3cda7c87ead7465e8ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Bradley M. Kuhn" Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 19:37:50 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Wordsmith this new FAQ entry. --- .../static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html | 13 +++++++------ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html index 4e014957..015d465d 100644 --- a/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html +++ b/www/conservancy/static/linux-compliance/vmware-lawsuit-faq.html @@ -181,13 +181,14 @@ Code, and for which (at least some) source code is provided. modifications to “vmkernel” in a tightly coupled manner.

-
Wait, is Conservancy proposing that a - “shim” layer is a viable solution for VMware to comply with - GPL?
+
Is Conservancy proposing a “shim + layer” as a viable solution for GPL compliance?
-
No, in fact, as we say above, Conservancy doesn't think the - phrase 'shim layer' has any meaning, despite its regular use in the - media.
+
No, in fact, as we say above, Conservancy doesn't think the phrase + “shim layer” has any meaning, despite regular use of that + phrase in the media. Conservancy generally doubts there is any + technological manipulation that changes the outcome of a + combined/derivative work analysis.
Can you give a specific example, with code, showing how VMware combined Linux source code with their binary-only components?