Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:59:36 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, adaplas@pol.net
Subject: Re: nvidia fb licensing issue.
Message-Id: <20050312215936.513039a6.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050313042459.GF32494@redhat.com>
References: <20050313042459.GF32494@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1108
Lines: 25

Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> The nvidia framebuffer code added recently is marked as
>  MODULE_LICENSE(GPL), but some things seem a little odd to me..
> 
>  1. The boilerplate at the top of drivers/video/nvidia/nv_dma.h,
>     drivers/video/nvidia/nv_local.h, and drivers/video/nvidia/nv_hw.c
>     doesn't seem to be a GPL-compatible license. It seems to be an nvidia
>     specific license with an advertising clause, and something that
>     adds restrictions on rights of U.S. Govt end users.
> 
>  2. Some of these files clearly came from XFree86 judging from
>     the CVS idents in the source.  Was this XFree86 code
>     dual-licensed by its original authors ? If so, it isn't clear.

Does

ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.11/2.6.11-mm3/broken-out/fbdev-nvidia-licensing-clarification.patch

clear things up?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/