Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965628AbXBOLQR (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:16:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965645AbXBOLQR (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:16:17 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:54305 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965628AbXBOLQQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:16:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:15:59 -0500 From: Dave Jones To: Xavier Bestel Cc: Mohammed Gamal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers Message-ID: <20070215111559.GA8353@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Xavier Bestel , Mohammed Gamal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <9b3a62ab0702142115m4ea7d2c0m6869eb64ef3ee14e@mail.gmail.com> <9b3a62ab0702142116n4069e16cl1bc8f546f41d935@mail.gmail.com> <20070215061149.GE15654@redhat.com> <9b3a62ab0702142227j19386132s870a0e745cfbb8d1@mail.gmail.com> <20070214231143.11ff6b46.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <9b3a62ab0702142328h87365b6i932d4f2c117f7f0e@mail.gmail.com> <1171533690.5835.40.camel@frg-rhel40-em64t-03> <52d4a3890702150251w7751da0cve55c6f2cf64e1b8e@mail.gmail.com> <1171537256.5835.60.camel@frg-rhel40-em64t-03> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1171537256.5835.60.camel@frg-rhel40-em64t-03> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1630 Lines: 42 On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 12:00:56PM +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote: > On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 12:51 +0200, Mohammed Gamal wrote: > > I am still a kernel newbie, and I am still not very much aware about > > the GPL vs. Non-GPL drivers debate. I personally think it'd be better > > that all drivers should be GPL'd but if that's the case, what would be > > the legal position of such vendors as ATI or NVIDIA who supply closed > > source drivers? Would it be illegal to use them? > > Yeah, this is a recurrent debate, and the positions are mixed. Linus > said that the nvidia driver isn't developed only for linux but also for > windows, so it's not a true derivative of the kernel, so the GPL doesn't > really apply. But not everyone (I mean core developpers) fully agrees > IIRC. to further expand on the above question it isn't really crystal clear whether this (from the ATI driver) is legal.. (psuedo diff vs the kernel agp drivers) +#ifdef STANDALONE_AGPGART MODULE_AUTHOR("Jeff Hartmann "); MODULE_PARM(agp_try_unsupported, "1i"); #ifdef MODULE_LICENSE MODULE_LICENSE("GPL and additional rights"); +#endif and then linking the result to their binary blob. I assume ATI's lawyers think its legal, as it's been a year and a half since I first brought this questionable act to their attention. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - 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/