Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030399AbVLWDjy (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:39:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030396AbVLWDjy (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:39:54 -0500 Received: from ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.56]:47843 "EHLO ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030395AbVLWDjx (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:39:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:38:54 -0500 (EST) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@gandalf.stny.rr.com To: Chris Wedgwood cc: Diego Calleja , jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com, mrmacman_g4@mac.com, legal@lists.gnumonks.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, garbageout@sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: blatant GPL violation of ext2 and reiserfs filesystem drivers In-Reply-To: <20051223032809.GA31909@taniwha.stupidest.org> Message-ID: References: <43AACF77.9020206@sbcglobal.net> <496FC071-3999-4E23-B1A2-1503DCAB65C0@mac.com> <1135283241.12761.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <43AB32C1.1080101@wolfmountaingroup.com> <20051223025638.GA31381@taniwha.stupidest.org> <20051223041522.ac36635d.diegocg@gmail.com> <20051223032809.GA31909@taniwha.stupidest.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1319 Lines: 34 On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:15:22AM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote: > > > So, a GPL application running on top of a BSD-licensed kernel > > (or library) is illegal? I doubt it... > > applications don't link with the kernel, modules do > > i don't know if that makes modules legal or not, but it's certainly > not clear cut > The thing here is that the GPL discusses distributing. If I were to receive a binary kernel, that happens to have implemented the same API as Linux, is it a violation of the GPL. As long as it doesn't use any of the same code and does a "clean room" kind of implementation of the API it is perfectly legal. So now if I have this binary kernel, and I myself compile a GPL module, I don't see anything in the GPL that would prevent me from linking it in. This is where it gets to be a problem with binary modules. They only implement up to the API (granted, it shouldn't include code in the headers), but it's the user that's linking and not the distributor. That is where the gray area lies. -- Steve - 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/