Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:58:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:57:59 -0400 Received: from boreas.isi.edu ([128.9.160.161]:14560 "EHLO boreas.isi.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 20 Oct 2001 18:57:58 -0400 To: Alan Cox cc: jan@gondor.com (Jan Niehusmann), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Input on the Non-GPL Modules In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 20 Oct 2001 23:04:11 BST." Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 15:58:18 -0700 Message-ID: <4307.1003618698@ISI.EDU> From: Craig Milo Rogers Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> 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 The fact is that the GPL (version 2, June 1991) does not constrain linking so long as the linked work is not copied or distributed (section 2). The fact is that "The act of running the Program is not restricted" (section 0). Other than that, we run out of "facts", because the whole area is untested legally, and the courts have a fair amount of latitude. I believe that the following statement is true: The GPL permits linking GPL'ed code with not-GPL-comformant code so long as the resultant derived work is not distributed. I believe that the "user-does-the-link" strategy is consonent with the text of the GPL version 2, although it might not have been intended by the document's author(s). I believe that individual symbol names are not covered by copyright (although they could be trademarked). In my opinion (I am not a lawyer, etc.), there is no compelling reason (other than being nice people) for non-GPL-compliant module writers to not link against a list of "GPL-only" symbols. Furthermore, I suspect that using a GPL-only symbol strategy to *restrict* runtime linking is itself PROHIBITED by GPL version 2 section 6 (the notorious "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients" clause). Having said my piece, I refuse discuss this topic in the immediate future on linux-kernel. I'll be happy to converse offline via email. Craig Milo Rogers - 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/