Message-ID: <45409BFA.8000507@compro.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 07:28:58 -0400
From: Mark Hounschell <markh@compro.net>
Reply-To: markh@compro.net
Organization: Compro Computer Svcs.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060725)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: dmarkh@cfl.rr.com, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Another kernel releated GPL ?
References: <4540839C.6010302@cfl.rr.com> <1161861128.12781.28.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <1161861128.12781.28.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1065
Lines: 23

Alan Cox wrote:
> Ar Iau, 2006-10-26 am 05:45 -0400, ysgrifennodd Mark Hounschell:
>> I make "modifications" to the kernel, then create a user land library to access
>> these "modifications". Obviously my kernel "modifications" are then GPL, but
>> what is the opinion of the kernel developers as far as the license of this
>> library? Does that user land library have to be GPL also?
> 
> Ask your lawyer. It depends on the legal definition of "derivative
> work", which isn't something a kernel developer can really answer.
> 

I'm sure every lawyer will have his own opinion. In the end won't it come down
to the intent of the kernel developer? Surly the definition of "derivative work"
has to be, or has been already, defined by someone other than a lawyer or court
that knows nothing of "kernel development"?

Mark

-
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/