Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:08:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:08:12 -0400 Received: from cx97923-a.phnx3.az.home.com ([24.9.112.194]:14491 "EHLO grok.yi.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:07:58 -0400 Message-ID: <3BD1F5CC.20BF3F20@candelatech.com> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 15:08:12 -0700 From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.12 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: Jan Niehusmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Input on the Non-GPL Modules In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > > > What prevents the author of a non-GPL module who needs access to a > > GPL-only symbol from writing a small GPLed module which imports the > > GPL-only symbol (this is allowed, because the small module is GPL), > > and exports a basically identical symbol without the GPL-only > > restriction? > > The fact that it ends up GPL'd to be linked (legal derivative work sense) > to the GPL'd code so you can link it to either but not both at the same time If you own the copyright to the small shim GPL piece, can anyone else take legal action on your part? If not, then all you have to do is not sue yourself for the double linkage and no one else can sue you either.... Ben -- Ben Greear President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear - 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/