Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750922AbWEPTyz (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 May 2006 15:54:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750920AbWEPTyz (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 May 2006 15:54:55 -0400 Received: from mail1.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.168]:62482 "EHLO mail1.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750915AbWEPTyy (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 May 2006 15:54:54 -0400 From: "David Schwartz" To: Cc: "linux-kernel-Mailing-list" Subject: RE: GPL and NON GPL version modules Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 12:54:03 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <1147769525.25330.137.camel@capoeira> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 16 May 2006 12:50:02 -0700 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 16 May 2006 12:50:05 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1684 Lines: 38 > Unless the "someone else will release a GPL wrapper to my proprietary > module" accident is planned from the start. > > Xav There certainly does seem to be some reason for suspicion. I would say that this doesn't matter so long as the two works are separate. That is, two people could plan this from the start, act in concert, and still be okay. However, they would have to make sure that nothing about the GPL wrapper contaminates the proprietary module. That is, the proprietary module must not in any way be designed to accomondate the GPL wrapper, except perhaps in the form of generic accomodation for any wrapper. If the proprietary module contains any code that is designed specifically to accomodate the GPL wrapper, the line is crossed. Whether or not that consitutes a legal violation, however, is a complicated question. So long as the proprietary module was not designed to work with GPL'd code (more than it's generically designed to work with other code of the same type) and contains no GPL'd code, you should be okay. However, as soon as any of the design of the proprietary code is intended to facilitate interoperation with specific GPL'd code, you could start to get into trouble. You should definitely consult a lawyer, but prepared for the answer, "nobody really knows". They can chart out what is almost definitely safe and what is almost definitely illegal, but there is a huge space in-between. DS - 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/