To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GPL vs non-GPL device drivers
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 10:00:27 +0100
Message-ID: <er94jf$s8s$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <er6mdq$ti8$1@sea.gmane.org> <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKKEKKBKAC.davids@webmaster.com> <er837a$8ks$1@sea.gmane.org> <f2b55d220702171555k1fde2e0ah2f46d5c2c1016a1e@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1428
Lines: 24

On Sunday 18 February 2007 00:55, Michael K. Edwards wrote:

> Or they could run:
>     find . -type f -exec
perl -i.bak -pe 's/EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL/EXPORT_SYMBOL/g'
> and be done with it.  Or even just MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") in their
> module -- that's not "lying about the module license", it's "doing the
> minimum necessary in order to interoperate efficiently with the
> kernel".  Atari v. Nintendo is still good law, but only to the
> extent that it does not conflict with Lexmark, which now has the seal
> of Supreme Court approval.  And (IMHO, IANAL) if writing
> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") is obviously the only remotely efficient way to
> achieve the goal of interoperation with the kernels that people
> already have on their systems

Except that this is not about a driver that is supposed to interoperated
with the kernels people already have on their systems. This is about
shipping new (embedded) systems with a modified (if you go the s/_GPL//g
route, even more so) Linux kernel, and distribution a modified kernel *has*
to comply with the GPL, since this is *exactly* what the GPL is about:
redistribution of modified copies of the work.

-- 
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta

-
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/