Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754088AbXFOM3p (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:29:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752256AbXFOM3i (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:29:38 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:45294 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752056AbXFOM3h (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:29:37 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:29:21 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: David Woodhouse Cc: Daniel Hazelton , Alan Cox , Alexandre Oliva , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Message-ID: <20070615122921.GA21120@elte.hu> References: <466A3EC6.6030706@netone.net.tr> <200706131946.15714.dhazelton@enter.net> <20070614021619.381331dc@the-village.bc.nu> <200706132129.52736.dhazelton@enter.net> <1181859896.5211.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20070615114921.GC6269@elte.hu> <1181908678.25228.448.camel@pmac.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1181908678.25228.448.camel@pmac.infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.1.7 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1506 Lines: 35 * David Woodhouse wrote: > > For example i'd say VMWare's ESX bin-only module is likely derived > > from the Linux kernel and should be distributed under the GPL, but > > that for example the ATI and nvidia drivers, although being a large > > PITA for all of us, are possibly independent works. > > And thus not affected by the GPL _if_ they are distributed as separate > works in their own right. But if you bundle them with the kernel into > a product, the GPL has something to say about that. yeah. Section 2 of the GPLv2 takes a permissive (and IMO correct) approach here: Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or collective works based on the Program. In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under the scope of this License. the argument is quite strong that the linking of two independent works is "mere aggregation" as well. (as long as they are truly separate works) Ingo - 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/