Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S280304AbRJaRFM>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:05:12 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S280306AbRJaRFD>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:05:03 -0500
Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:3089 "EHLO
	the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S280304AbRJaREw>; Wed, 31 Oct 2001 12:04:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Module Licensing?
To: ttabi@interactivesi.com (Timur Tabi)
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 17:11:52 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <3BE02C94.4020007@interactivesi.com> from "Timur Tabi" at Oct 31, 2001 10:53:40 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E15yyu8-0004La-00@the-village.bc.nu>
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> Our open source bits are GPL because they are "derived" from the kernel 
> source, which is also GPL.

Thanks I've filed that statement should it ever be useful.

> FYI, I don't consider including a header file basis for calling the module 
> "derived" from that header file, but that's just my personal opinion and 
> doesn't really affect this discussion.

Interface definitions tend to be treated a little differently to "code". But
as I keep trying to beat into people - if you are going to mix GPL and non
GPL code see a lawyer - thats what they are there for
-
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/