Subject: Re: Developing non-commercial drivers ?
From: Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr>
To: Fredrik =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Markstr=F6m?= 
	<fredrik.markstrom@avalonenterprise.com>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <7a9e70560811180852y9eb2bf6s8682609dcb10fd9f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <fc262dee0811180816k29cc93aas51c2c47ede2c7a1@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4922ED5A.3030808@shaw.ca>
	 <7a9e70560811180852y9eb2bf6s8682609dcb10fd9f@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:17:47 +0100
Message-Id: <1227028667.12044.9.camel@skunk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1185
Lines: 29

On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 17:52 +0100, Fredrik Markstr?m wrote:
> Thanks for the prompt respons.
> 
> I do agree that it would be better for everyone to release it under
> GPL and I have already expressed that to our customer.
> 
> At this point I feel that we have two possibilities, help our customer
> violate GPL or say no to the project. I'd prefer a third option where
> I could tell the customer that we can setup the project in a certain
> way (some "cleanroom" setup ?) to ensure that the results can not be
> considered derived work.
> 
> Is your short answer also the definite answer considering this ?

Why not distributing the driver to your client under the same licence
terms as the kernel (i.e. GPLv2, tell him you're legally tied to it),
and then let your client handle distribution to the end-user the way it
sees fit ?
That way you come out clean, and your client gets to resolve the
eventual legal troubles himself.

	Xav


--
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/